In the US you can exhibit photos of people all you want without proving anything. The problems typically come up when you use a photo in a way that may endorse something. See http://www.kantor.com/blog/Legal-Rights-of-Photographers.pdf
Igor Roshchin wrote: > Bill, > > I am not sure about Canadian laws. At some point I looked into the > issues of a "universal" model release form, and found that laws > vary widely, even between different states in the US. > > I vaguely remember that just recently, a decision of some court > (probably in the US) that it was ok to display as a part of an art > exhibition a photo of a person in a public place without a model release, > but it had to be proven that it was art. > I am not sure if something similar applies in your case. > > You may want to consider checking with the Regina Shutterbugs camera > club, and see what their position on this is, and whether they > had any releases or agreements signed by the model. > If they have one, it may (or may not) help you, depending on the > document. > > ann sanfedele wrote: >> Especially since she was naked. > IMHO, whether she was naked or not may charge it emotionally, > but should not matter in the legalese. > > Igor > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
