I have taken many photos along and around the California coast from
Point Fermin Lighthoust to Malibu and on and on.
I am now submitting my photos to stock houses and am finding that
many of these places require permits to take pictures for
commercial purposes.
in general i think a permit, permission, or the legal right to
shoot without special permission of or from a given area is a
separate issue from the usage you're allowed to make from the
results. a permit or permission to shoot doesn't constitute a
release for usage in situations where the subject or property owner
has a right to govern said usage. conversely, the fact that you
might not need a permit to shoot from a given location doesn't mean
you don't need still need a release for the subject depending on
the type of use you make of it.
also in general a model or property release is only needed in a
commercial use and not in an editorial use so the next thing to
consider is what constitutes a commercial use. contrary to what i
get the impression you're thinking, commercial use doesn't mean
"professional" use, or that you're simply being paid for the use or
purchase of your photos. a commercial use would be if the photo was
being used to advertise or promote something or someone. an
editorial use would be to illustrate to inform, for public
interest, to teach etc. such as news photography or any other
content in a publication outside of the advertising.
if you put those two ideas together you'll realize, for instance,
that a museum might allow you to shoot inside, or a person in
public can be shot without permission, or even with their
permission and yet that permission doesn't give you the right to
use the recognizable images of person or property in an
advertisement. you have to realize that in most cases permits for
using public property are there to govern the actual usage of the
property itself not how the images OF the property are used. i'm
suspecting however that in most cases the use of the images of the
state land itself are not governed, only the permission to shoot
and base your production on them. the reason i'm thinking that is
because there's not a single word about usage or release of rights
to use the images of the property in the permit form or in it's
terms and conditions.
so i think it's likely that much of what you've shot can be used
for stock and published as long as it's used editorially. however
some publishers and some stock agencies are concerned enough about
possibly getting sued that they are over precautious and require
releases even when they are probably not really needed.
i'm wondering where you heard or if you specifically heard that an
actual property release is needed for recognizable california
property? or is someone just confusing the need for a permit to
shoot in the first place with the need for a property release?
i also wonder, since the cali people seem so sure about this, if in
fact there is permission needed for the actual use but that the
permit does in fact serve as that permission also and this is
covered elsewhere in the law but it's not mentioned on the film
commission site or in the terms? i'd find that very strange and
improbable that it wouldn't be mentioned there if it was an issue.
Ok, at the time they were for personal use. Can I not use a picture
taken in Sequoia or Yosemite or Malibu as stock so long as a person
is not in it???
This whole subject is driving me crazy. I find out the Santa Monica
Pier is copyrighted? Sheesh! Can't use a single picture I took
there.
Any help with this would really be appreciated. I know the subject
has probably been talked to death but I sure could use some expert
advice.
a man made structure is very likely different, but as for plain old
natural scenery, if it is in fact governed, then you can still use
it, even commercially as long as it can't be identified as a
specific place or as definitely being part of the governed
property. so depending on the nature of your shots i imagine
there's a lot that can't be identified.
actual experts you might not find here, check with the film
commission, and check with a legal expert specializing in that
particular area of the law not just any attorney, not even just any
IP attorney
