permissions to use photos of people in the public eye

You've got to be a lot more specific.

If you want to print a photo of President Obama, for example, just request his official photograph from the White House. That's created with your tax dollars and is a public record.

Now, what would that add to your book? Nothing, really. Everyone knows what the president looks like.

For anything else, it really depends on the details.

kousa said:

Is there a location to access and receive permission to use, in a non-fiction book, photos of public officials or individuals in the public eye?


Thanks.

Click to expand...

You can buy photos from photo agencies or other such storehouses; most anyone even remotely in the public eye is available in the db of the larger agencies.

kousa said:

You can buy photos from photo agencies or other such storehouses; most anyone even remotely in the public eye is available in the db of the larger agencies.



In this day and age where nearly everyone has a camera in their pocket, and the web holds millions of photos, I am looking for access to photos "for the taking". Photos are more plentiful than trees.

Click to expand...

You want to publish them, not look at them. Thus you need permission from the rights-holder of the photograph. Most rights-holders will request money. As jw says, some may not, depending, but you still need permission.

You can see what is 'for the taking' at free stock sites. Morguefile, sxu, wikimedia commons etc.

Don't be surprised if you don't find what you need there. If a person has a good picture, and you are going to use it commercially, why would they not expect to be paid?

Wikimedia Commons has a lot of free-to-use images with some restrictions, but as others have said, a lot of excellent photography can only be obtained at a cost.

kousa said:

In this day and age where nearly everyone has a camera in their pocket, and the web holds millions of photos, I am looking for access to photos "for the taking". Photos are more plentiful than trees.

Click to expand...

Just a side note, but just because photos are more plentiful does not mean their value has dropped. Almost all professional photography still comes with a cost attached, and it's very important you know the licensing restrictions on the pieces you're using.

There was an incident last year where a blogger had legal action taken against them because they used images off Google Images etc in their blog posts, assuming images shown there could be freely used. They can't, and one of the photographers whose work was used took the blogger on for financial reimbursement, as was their right.

EMaree said:

Wikimedia Commons has a lot of free-to-use images with some restrictions, but as others have said, a lot of excellent photography can only be obtained at a cost.



Just a side note, but just because photos are more plentiful does not mean their value has dropped. Almost all professional photography still comes with a cost attached, and it's very important you know the licensing restrictions on the pieces you're using.

There was an incident last year where a blogger had legal action taken against them because they used images off Google Images etc in their blog posts, assuming images shown there could be freely used. They can't, and one of the photographers whose work was used took the blogger on for financial reimbursement, as was their right.

Click to expand...

What EMaree said. There are many such actions. Happens all the time, just doesn't always end in a public battle. I know of people sued over plagiarizing recipes - the original author didn't even know, someone else saw it and remembered it had been published someplace else. I used to know someone who held a trademark on a phrase that a tv personality started using in published stuff (as an identifier - this isn't it, but like 'The King of Pillows'-type thing) and etc. Many people who knew the trademark holder enjoyed emailing her whenever they saw a violation; it was just added to the suit. Photographers look for their stuff, trace where their stuff goes, etc.

Welcome to AW kousa. Just an aside, you can use the "quote" button at the bottom of the post you want to quote and it will put that post in a box in your post, so you don't have to copy/paste/change font color. If there is more than one post you want to quote, the button next to it with the " marks each post you want to quote and then on the last one, click "quote" and all of the posts will be quoted for you.

Good luck with your writing and photo search.

On Google Images there is a way to change the filter settings under "advanced search" to "free to use or share" but I noticed even those tend to have restrictions, like they are free but only for non commercial use and/or with credit to the artists.

kousa said:

What EMaree said. There are many such actions. Happens all the time, just doesn't always end in a public battle. I know of people sued over plagiarizing recipes - the original author didn't even know, someone else saw it and remembered it had been published someplace else. I used to know someone who held a trademark on a phrase that a tv personality started using in published stuff (as an identifier - this isn't it, but like 'The King of Pillows'-type thing) and etc. Many people who knew the trademark holder enjoyed emailing her whenever they saw a violation; it was just added to the suit. Photographers look for their stuff, trace where their stuff goes, etc.

Yes, I am well aware of the potential restrictions. I am looking for photos without the restrictions and with only a minor cost, if any.

Speaking of the restrictions, does anyone know if a photo is taken in the photographer's home, by a non-professional photographer of individuals, do the people in the photo image have a right to privacy, thus a release signed by them would be required before any widespread distribution, for profit, could occur? The image would not be used to promote a product, service, or an idea. It would be used in a book.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Using it in a book IS using it to promote a product - the book.

kousa said:

In your above sentence, does non-commercial mean non-profit, or does it mean "not promoting a service, product or idea"?

Thanks.

Click to expand...

It means don't use it on anything you are going to make any money from. And always assume you will need a model release. It will save you trouble in the long run.

kousa said:

Sure, but there may be occasions where a release is not possible, so knowing what is permissible is important.

Click to expand...

Pretty sure, but you should contact a lawyer who deals specifically with the issue before you go ahead with anything that may cause you to become embroiled in expensive litigation down the road.

If a release is not possible, but should be obtained, then you can't use the photo - that can be a reason why people's faces will be blurred out in some broadcasts. Either the people wouldn't sign or they couldn't find the people to sign. The impossibility of you obtaining a release doesn't do anything to the requirement for one if one is required.

Again, there's also the need for a release from the rights-holder, the person who took it. Only if you took it or if it is explicitly placed for public use (just posting it online is NOT doing this), is that not an issue.

The person who took the photo owns it. Period. If you want to use it you need permission. Commercial means for purposes that will make you money. So if you plan on selling the book it's commercial. As far as people being in public, i dont know the specifics but you'll note photos and shows with people in public with blurred faces, as mentioned.

May I ask where you are in the process? If you plan on getting it published I think the publisher would help in some of this. I think.

kousa said:

Sure, but there may be occasions where a release is not possible, so knowing what is permissible is important.

Click to expand...

When it comes to including a picture in a book you plan to offer for sale, sad as it may be, you use a different picture.

sassandgroove said:

May I ask where you are in the process? If you plan on getting it published I think the publisher would help in some of this. I think.

Click to expand...

In my experience, the author of a book is almost always responsible for obtaining the permissions required to use quoted material.

If the publisher sources photos and illustrations, the publisher usually obtains the required permissions; if the author sources photos and illustrations, the author usually obtains the required permissions.

Thread closed as redundant