unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Mikehit said:Canon Rumors said:I also hope they clean up the liability issues they've created. It's not their fault that a majority of people that are submitting images are unaware or don't think it's a big deal to get releases, but I think it's Unsplash's responsibility to educate in that regard.
As far as I am aware, getting releases is the responsibility of the person using the photograph for commercial use , not the photographer and applies to commercial use not general web posting. Or did I misunderstand your point?
It's not that simple.
The issue is appropriation and it means that no one can use your likeness for commercial purposes without your permission. It also applies to products that are identifiable -- for example a McDonald's logo.
Contrary to what many misinformed people think, it is not a privacy issue. If you are in a public place, you do not have a right to privacy. (I am speaking only of U.S. law by the way.)
But, you have a right not to have your image appropriated by someone else for profit. And, profit can be very broadly defined. For example, a photographer who posts to Unsplash in the hopes of securing commercial work is profiting from the individual's likeness.
Everyone along the chain has potential liability. The photographer, the provider (in this case Unsplash) and the end user. To avoid liability, the photographer would have to be able to prove that they informed the end user that they did not have a model release. Uploading an image to a website like Unsplash and then letting the world download it would not relieve the photographer of liability because he or she had a reasonable expectation that the photograph was going to be used for commercial purposes. So, yes, the photographer could easily be held liable.
To pile on a bit, by custom and practice, photographers are generally expected to secure a model release from their subjects if they are going to offer the picture up for commercial use. An end user could very easily argue that the images on Unsplash are marketed as free to use with no restrictions and that it was the responsibility of the person uploading the image to secure the necessary rights to the image before uploading it. In fact, most reputable stock photo sites specifically require the photographer to have a release. I would not be surprised if Unsplash, after this dust up, inserts language into their user agreement that states that by uploading a picture you are certifying that you have secured all necessary releases. (UPDATE: I just checked their website and they have language that definitely leaves the photographer holding the bag. I will follow up with another post)
I'm not going to extend this post any longer than necessary, but will state that my above comments only apply to images used for commercial purposes. Editorial and artistic uses have different standards.
Upvote
0