Youth sports questions

[JDueckPhoto]

I've been taking pictures of my kids sporting events, like football, basketball, baseball, etc... recently other parents have asked me for pictures of their kids and how much I charge. I'm getting enough requests that I'd like to know if anyone has any advice about the legality of selling sports photos of kids (ONLY to their parents).

Also, a photo of one player often has 2 or more other kids in it, adding to the complexity. There are businesses here in Oregon that primarily shoot youth sports so I'm interested in looking into it more.

 

[JaniceL]

Releases, there's an app for that. Easy Release, for the Droid, iphone and ipad.

 

[JDueckPhoto]

I guess there's an app for everything?!

Thanks for the responses.

 

[NinaS]

I shot youth sports for 6yrs ... the sports leagues have the photography part covered in their sign up releases, so do the schools. If a parent ever asked, I would have pulled a pic out of my gallery, but it never happened, and I shot in the CYO for the private schools ... there is no expectation of privacy at a game where the public is allowed ... make sure you have your team's coach's approval before moving forward ... you're safe!

now, don't give away the farm, get enough back to to buy new toys for your camera bag ... look into an easy sales gallery such as exposuremanager.com for a small commission, they'll process your orders, print & mail ... all you have to do is shoot & upload

 

[JDueckPhoto]

Nina,
My wife is 100% agreed...no giving away the farm.

We are both on the board of a local league, and we dont have a photography release section for sign ups yet. Its a separate form, but we'll have to add that into the sign-ups. That would be much easier.

 

[climbbike]

From what I've read, as long as you are taking them in public, you can sell photos of anyone with no model release whatsoever. You only need a model release if you are using the photos to market/sell some product.

 

[JDueckPhoto]

That's the part that gets me. The local newspaper can take youth sports photos with no release and put them in to sell papers. From a league standpoint however, I need a release to publish or sell photos. Ill progress on the side of caution, if only to save my tail.

 

[ron]

Newpaper images are considered "editorial" use and do not require a model release. A photographer that is working for themselves or a private company is considered "commercial" usage and a release is required. Tons of information on this online.
Most stock agencies are now requiring model releases for any image that has any body part in it even if there is no way you could identify the person. Too many lawsuits and too much liability now days.
I know of several photographers that have been sued over this and it cost them a lot of money.
Absolutely not worth the risk. In all the years I have been shooting, I have only had a couple of people(actually parents) that refused to sign a release.

Ron

 

[JaniceL]

There is seemingly fine line between what is considered editorial vs commercial. I'd like to share the point of view of a large stock company.

I sell a few photos on Getty which has a really strict policy on model releases. Their attitude is if anybody can recognize themselves in a photo (unless it is a large crowd shot) even it a face can't be seen they require a release. Even if it is a blurry view of the backside of somebody wearing a red jacket, blue jeans and leaning against a rail a release is required. Their argument is that somebody just might recognize themselves by virtue of their clothing combination and can place themselves in that location the day the photo was shot they have grounds to win a lawsuit. The cost of litigation is not worth the risk in my opinion.

Check out the link to Amazon and find the "Photographer's Market"
or "Legal Handbook for Photographers" By Bert Krages. Both have simple releases.

Getty requires that something be given in exchange for the release to bind the contract, it may be something as simple as providing the subject with a print.

BTW, Getty has the same requirement for property. So when you see that great weather beaten barn in eastern Oregon if you want to sell it as stock you better have a property release. Same is true of a pet or an animal in a zoo or an aquarium.

 

[BobH]

I agree with both Ron and Jake's comments. You can find a lot of conflicting info on things like this, some folks will argue it's a public event and so people don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy. That's been upheld for public streets and the like, but when you get into sports arenas etc, it gets fuzzy. It apparently also matters what the photo is being used for, and whether or not the person in the photo is part of the main subject, or just incidental to the image. (Are they the star, or just an "extra"? so to speak...) For example, a shot that's posted on the teams website would probably be seen differently than ad saying "Fueled by Monster Energy Drinks"

As Jake mentions, when kids are involved, it gets even touchier. My personal policy is to not include kids in my event photos if I can avoid it. When I need shots with kids, then I work with the event organizer to get model releases from the parents. That way, both the event and I are covered.

Here's another question to ask yourself... Are you going to make enough money to make it worth the hassle? Would you possibly be better served by giving the photos to the parents and saying "Donate $20 to the team athletic fund if you like the shot..." and toss in a business card with a note saying "Please consider having me photograph your son/daughters Senior Portrait!"

On the other hand, if the demand really is there in a worthwhile volume, then working with the school and coach is probably the right approach for everyone concerned.

 

[JDueckPhoto]

You can find a lot of conflicting info on things like this,

Yes! I have run into many different opinions and I've seen several different requirements. This does help me clear things up though.

 

[BobH]

There's one thing you won't run into differing opinions on though. Nobody is ever going to say that having a signed photo release is a bad thing. They may say you didn't need one in some cases (...and they may be correct, I'm not a lawyer, and don't play one on TV, or the internet) but having one should never work to your disadvantage.

So, if you're in doubt, going the safe route and having a release is probably the best approach. The same goes for working the school and team if you're doing anything more than just selling a couple photos to friends.