 Alina R. Cabral |
photos of Wines for a review Hi everyone, I'm new here and new in the photography field. I'm currently working for a local magazine that is doing a wine review on some specific wines. They've asked me to take photos of these wines selected by them so they can do a review. I don't mean to sound off-beat here but I have no idea if this would be consider a violation of copyright or can I possibly take a photo of say a bottle of Pinot Noir and provide the photo for print? Please advice. Desperately needs answers. THANKS!!!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jagadeesh Andrew Owens |
Who? What? Parlez vous ingles? LOL! Slow down, take a deep breath, and tell us more! Mark Feldstein is our resident expert here on model/minor model/property releases, so he should be here in a minute. Until then - my two cents: Just call the number on the bottle or the distributor to get the winemaker's contact info, and call them! Be honest, tell them you're a photographer for a paper that will be featuring their wine in a review and you would like to take photos of it to use. Offer to fax them the property release. Are these big wine houses or small mom and pop vineyards? You'll have an easier time all around with the local vineyards... Attention BP Mart shoppers: Will Mark Feldstein come to the customer help desk?? Paging a Mr. Feldstein...
|
|
|
|
||
|
Amy JACKSON |
I would also ask the local magazine you are working for.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
As Sipho suggested, easy there Alina, your glue is melting. Relax although you're certainly right to ask about this. Most commercial vintners have marketing agreements with their wholesale and retail sellers/distributors that allow them to generate photographs of the product, i.e., bottles of wine, for marketing or favorable publicity purposes. And, unless it's a really unique package, it's the label that's copyrighted and trademarked, along separate right protections for what's inside the bottle. So, for openers, a photograph of a generic glass of wine isn't violating any vintner's rights because the specific vintner is unrecognizable. If there is a whole bottle involved and the label is recognizable, it's a good idea to get a release from the vintner because you personally aren't a marketing firm, etc. When you ask the magazine to obtain a signed copy of the release for you and says "Nah, it's ok, go ahead. They said it would be fine" I think it would be prudent for you to call the winery on your own, talk to their marketing director and get a signed release to photograph their property for publication, especially if the critic bum raps them in a column under your photograph. Nonetheless, as I recall that particular varietal was very bold in its adolescence with a puckish pallate and a bullish sense of misbegotten political humor. ;>) Well, by the clock I see it's Chateau Mondavi Poully Fuse 78 time. Gotta run kids. Salud.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
I'm not completely for sure positive, but there's likely a difference between a newspaper doing this vs. a magazine. In the situation you described, a magazine, I'd say the release rules for copyrighted/trademarked properties apply. So, yeah, I'd get a release, which, btw, is what I've done when I shoot wine bottles out here and the label shows. Otherwise, I turn the bottle slightly so the label isn't seen. M.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alina R. Cabral |
Thank you all! I appreciate your prompt response. This has helped me tremedously. =)
|
|
|
|
||
|
W. |
Since the magazine (or newspaper) is going to be doing the publishing, it is the magazine that would be committing a 'faux pas' (if there is any 'faux pas' to be committed). THEY would/could be in violation of copyright. Not you. So I'd let THEM worry about releases, and contacting the copyright holder(s) and such, and I'd use my scarce enough time to create great photos, not to run around getting releases.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Unfortunately, Alina, W.S. got it wrong. The one who does the work is the one ultimately responsible especially given the fact that you either knew or should have known that there was potentially a copyright issue in volved. Now, I'm not ringing alarm bells or anything, but this is one of those deals where hypothetically the aggrieved party, say the winery's lawyers, would simply sue anyone connected directly with the project for infringement and let the court sort it out later during a process called "discovery". So, even if this wasn't your idea to begin with, as the one responsible for execution of the idea, you're still on the hook. And...if you per chance doubt what I'm telling you, talk to a lawyer who specializes in intellectual property, and I'm pretty certain that they'll tell you the same things I did.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||