RE: [Leica] model releases etc.

["Tim Atherton" <tim@KairosPhoto.com>]

Hi Ted,

To make a long story short...

Quebec,  (taking it's laws from France) has a Privacy clause in its
Constitution which counter balances the Rights to Freedom of Expression.
(The rest of Canada does not, though a number of Provinces have or are
introducing some form of privacy legislation, though none as strong or as
entrenched as Quebec).

A student was photographed (without her knowledge) sat on the front step of
her building in a seedier part of Montreal (I think). The image was used in
a very small magazine as part of an essay about this "down and out" part  of
the City, using this photographers work. Other students saw the story and
there was some minor ridicule.

She went to Court and eventually sued - successfully. In the end it came
down to  invasion of privacy under the (Quebec) Charter of Rights. This went
all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada. The CBC etc had standing and so
on. Didn't make much difference though.

The Court set out some broad guidelines for media. You may not use a general
picture of an identifiable individual for a generic type story without their
permission. E.g. identifiable picture of Quebecer trying to open their
umbrella in the wind for "Quebec gets Spring Storms" story is out. And you
can go a good way along this scale in terms of needing permission.

Identifiable people as part of a larger scene but who are somewhat
identifiable are more okay, as are pictures of individuals where they are
part of a story of social significance (or something like that - the
guidelines veer more towards news than long term social issues) i.e. "Biker
dude is arrested at Rock Machine clubhouse.

From what I am told, this is much the same as in France - a friend who lives
and works in Paris was doing a magazine story on immigrants in Marseilles
and had to get releases from absolutely everybody.

This is all from memory. Somewhere I have articles on this, and can dig out
a link to the Supreme Court case if anyone is really interested....


Tim A

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Ted Grant
> Sent: May 22, 2001 8:01 AM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] model releases etc.
>
>
> Sam wrote:
> >>are you all in Europe?  I am here in the states and it is my
> understanding
> that I only need a model release IF I am going to be using the image for
> advertising.  As far as fine art goes and putting the images in
> books, news
> papers, and galleries, a model release is
> > not necessary in the United States of America.  Am I missing
> something?<<<
>
> Hi Sam,
> I would be very prudent shooting in the Canadian Province of Quebec
> regarding model releases and the uses you pointed out where a
> model release
> isn't required.
>
> I'm sure a LUG member of Quebec will respond here shortly.
>
> But there was a court case, last year?, where a photographer was sued,
> certainly hauled into court,  for using a photograph in some simple
> situation and did not have the release of the person in the photo.
>
> Hopefully, a Quebecois will fill in the details on this court case and how
> the outcome reads... but take care if you're publishing any "people
> pictures" taken in Quebec.
>
> This only applies to Quebec and not the rest of Canada.
> ted
>
> Ted Grant Photography Limited
> www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant
>