"if you plan to take pictures of strangers and you're going to receive any income from that, you need to have a commerical purpose consent form signed acknowledging that."
Actually this is still a grey area. This area where it is NOT grey is when the person's image is used in advertising or promotion, which courts have ruled includes something like a magazine cover as it is in essence advertising the magazine itself. And of course misrepresentation (which such use really is) is a clear cut issue. But when it comes to the Cartier-Bresson aspect of art documenting public life, even when the resulting work is sold, we are still floundering in uncertain waters (and I note that to require releases for such work would make a huge portion of very important cultural work illegal or impossible to perform). This is different, however, than formal interview situations, in which case releases are indeed prudent, regardless or their legal necessity. Disclaimer: not a lawyer. Brook _______________________________________________________ Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
