Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-mrvax!ddb
From: ddb@mrvax.DEC (DAVID DYER-BENNET MRO1-2/L14 DTN 231-4076)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Model releases
Message-ID: <3439@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 27-Aug-84 13:53:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.3439
Posted: Mon Aug 27 13:53:20 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 30-Aug-84 20:15:13 EDT
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 18

Identification of the photos covered by a model release is sometimes
interesting.  Usually, a release is for an entire session; the model
rarely gets to pick and choose which photos to release.  Many standard
form releases appear to be for all photos ever taken, which I find
appalling -- do people really use those professionally, or is that just
something some lawyer working for a photographer thought would be nice?
I also wonder about the legal validity of such a general release.

It would be interesting if the photographer in the Williams/Penthouse
case would produce the release that he alleges covers the photos.

On the other hand, if Ms. Williams really thinks she didn't sign a
release, she should be suing.  The lack of legal action suggests to
me that her lawyers don't think she has a case.  Publication of nude
photos without a release is considered to be pretty serious in this country.

			-- David Dyer-Bennet
			-- {decvax|purdue|ihnp4}!decwrl!rhea!mrvax!ddb