Releases
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2016 7:22 pm
I wanted to mension something here because I happened to see a video by a photographer on You Tube about model releases and how in some cases they are necessary.
Now, in the case of Jonsey's latest game it's such a small distribution and as such nobody is likely to notice. But use of someone's likeness requires a release if the person might object and it may also require additional provisions if it puts the person in a bad light.
Let me note I'm not talking about myself, I'm actually kind of flattered that Jonsey used my picture for one of the characters in his game.
But there is the possibility he might develop something big in the future and if someone whose picture (likeness) is used for commercial purposes - a game in this case - and someone smells money they might want to go after it.
So it's a good idea to have a model release or some paperwork indicating they approve of the use. Also, releases are not contracts so no money has to change hands for one to be valid.
Also, beyond having a model release, you may also, in certain cases, want a "false light" release, lest you be sued for defamation. If you portray someone in a bad light, e.g. you show them as suffering from AIDS, are a child molester, are a nasty villain who uses kittens for bait to attract fish, or eats puppies, that sort of thing, you could be sued if the person feels this portrays them in a bad way that is untrue, i.e. "in a false light."
The photographer in the video I saw told a story about another photographer who failed to do this. One charitable organization had a release for pictures used of a woman and a boy, but the ad it was used in showed as an example how she was a woman who had overcome her drug habit but not before her son picked it up. One problem was neither used drugs and the woman didn't know that the ad would be used to portray her negatively.
The organization that ran the ad - a public charity - had to pay quite a bit of money in damages even though they had a release, because they did not have a release for "portrayal in a false light."
You can bet every movie where someone plays the bad guy (or girl), their paperwork includes a release where the portrayal of their character is clearly stated and has been signed off.
So I wanted you to be aware of this in case you do a game where someone is shown as a villain, criminal, has a loathsome disease or is otherwise shown in a bad light. Because you could be in trouble, requiring the game be pulled and the material removed, possibly even money damages.
It's just good sense to be aware of this.
Now, in the case of Jonsey's latest game it's such a small distribution and as such nobody is likely to notice. But use of someone's likeness requires a release if the person might object and it may also require additional provisions if it puts the person in a bad light.
Let me note I'm not talking about myself, I'm actually kind of flattered that Jonsey used my picture for one of the characters in his game.
But there is the possibility he might develop something big in the future and if someone whose picture (likeness) is used for commercial purposes - a game in this case - and someone smells money they might want to go after it.
So it's a good idea to have a model release or some paperwork indicating they approve of the use. Also, releases are not contracts so no money has to change hands for one to be valid.
Also, beyond having a model release, you may also, in certain cases, want a "false light" release, lest you be sued for defamation. If you portray someone in a bad light, e.g. you show them as suffering from AIDS, are a child molester, are a nasty villain who uses kittens for bait to attract fish, or eats puppies, that sort of thing, you could be sued if the person feels this portrays them in a bad way that is untrue, i.e. "in a false light."
The photographer in the video I saw told a story about another photographer who failed to do this. One charitable organization had a release for pictures used of a woman and a boy, but the ad it was used in showed as an example how she was a woman who had overcome her drug habit but not before her son picked it up. One problem was neither used drugs and the woman didn't know that the ad would be used to portray her negatively.
The organization that ran the ad - a public charity - had to pay quite a bit of money in damages even though they had a release, because they did not have a release for "portrayal in a false light."
You can bet every movie where someone plays the bad guy (or girl), their paperwork includes a release where the portrayal of their character is clearly stated and has been signed off.
So I wanted you to be aware of this in case you do a game where someone is shown as a villain, criminal, has a loathsome disease or is otherwise shown in a bad light. Because you could be in trouble, requiring the game be pulled and the material removed, possibly even money damages.
It's just good sense to be aware of this.