You shoot a portrait that stops people scrolling. A stranger in a striking coat, perfect light, the kind of frame you’d happily print and sell. You own the copyright the instant you press the shutter – so you can sell it, right? Not so fast. Copyright answers who owns the photograph. It says nothing about the person or the building inside the photograph, and those can have rights of their own. That’s where releases come in.
A release is a short, signed permission slip. A model release is consent from a recognizable person to use their likeness. A property release is consent from the owner of private property – a building, a pet, a distinctive object – to use images of it. Neither is about copyright. They exist because of a separate right, and getting them wrong is the fastest way to turn a great image into a legal headache. (This is general information, not legal advice.)
Copyright vs. the Right of Publicity
Here’s the distinction that trips up almost every new creator. As the photographer, you generally own the copyright. But an identifiable person has a right of publicity – the right to control commercial use of their name, face, and likeness. These are two different rights held by two different people, and both have to be satisfied before you can license a photo for certain uses.
Track the cases yourself
Every current AI-copyright ruling — and the ones still being fought — lives in our AI Copyright Ruling Tracker. Filter by your creator type to see, in plain language, how each case affects your rights.
The right of publicity is not federal; it’s state law, so the details vary. California’s statute (Civil Code section 3344) is one of the strongest, letting people sue when their likeness is used for advertising or selling without consent. New York has its own version. A release is simply the document that clears this right in advance, so a buyer – a brand, a stock agency, an ad agency – knows they won’t get sued for using the image the way they intend.
The One Question That Decides It: Commercial vs. Editorial
Most of the confusion around releases disappears once you ask a single question: how will the image be used? The line runs between commercial and editorial use.
Commercial use means using the image to sell or promote something – an advertisement, product packaging, a company website’s marketing, merchandise, a book cover implying endorsement. This is the use that needs a release. Using a recognizable face to help sell a product, without permission, is the classic right-of-publicity problem.
Editorial use means using the image to inform, report, comment, or express – news, documentary, journalism, education, and most fine art displayed or sold as art. Here you have far more freedom. As Stanford’s copyright guide puts it, you generally don’t need a release to use someone’s image in a newsworthy or artistic context. That’s why a street-photography print can hang in a gallery, but the same photo can’t be slapped on a soda can without a signature.
One useful wrinkle: courts have generally held that simply offering a photo for licensing – listing it in a stock catalog – isn’t itself a commercial use of the subject’s likeness. The commercial use happens when the end buyer puts it in an ad. But stock agencies still demand releases up front, because they’re selling the promise that the image is safe for commercial buyers.
When You Need a Model Release
Get a signed model release whenever a person is recognizable and the image could be used commercially. “Recognizable” is broader than just a clear face – a distinctive tattoo, a silhouette, or a well-known setting can identify someone. When both boxes are checked, get the signature. When in doubt, get it anyway; it costs you nothing and protects every future sale.
You generally don’t need one when the person isn’t identifiable (shot from behind, heavily blurred, a hand or shoe), or when the use is purely editorial or fine art. But “I’ll only ever use it editorially” is a promise you may not keep – the brand that later wants to license it will ask for the release you never got. Collecting releases as a habit keeps your options open.
When You Need a Property Release
Property releases are less about copyright and more about the owner’s rights and your access. You generally want one for commercial use of private property that is recognizable and central to the image: someone’s home, the interior of a private business, a recognizable pet, or a distinctive object like a custom car or a piece of art.
Public spaces are usually fair game – you can photograph and sell an image of a public street or skyline. The gray areas are private buildings with trademarked or iconic designs, museum interiors and other venues where you agreed to terms on the ticket, and images shot on private land where the owner set conditions for access. A property release (and knowing where you were standing when you shot) keeps a commercial buyer comfortable that no one will object.
The Tricky Cases: Minors, Crowds, Tattoos, and Logos
A few situations deserve extra care:
- Minors. A child can’t consent. You need a parent or legal guardian to sign, and many releases ask for the minor’s date of birth. This matters more, not less, for anything commercial.
- Crowds and public events. You generally can’t get everyone to sign, and for editorial use you don’t need to. For commercial use, focus on the people who are recognizable and prominent; incidental background faces are lower risk, but stock agencies may still reject the image.
- Tattoos, artwork, and logos in frame. A large custom tattoo or a piece of art can carry its own copyright, and prominent brand logos can raise trademark issues in ads. For commercial work, compose to minimize them or clear them.
- Pets and animals. Animals have no publicity rights, but their owner may need to sign a property release for commercial use of a recognizable pet.
What a Good Release Must Include – and Where to Get One
A release doesn’t need to be long. A workable one identifies the person or property, names you (the photographer/licensor) as the one receiving permission, and grants the right to use the likeness or image, ideally broadly (“in any media, now or later, including advertising”). Add the date, the subject’s signature (and a guardian’s for a minor), and a witness line if you want extra weight. Some releases note whether payment or other consideration was given.
You don’t have to draft it from scratch. Reputable, free, industry-standard templates come from the American Society of Media Photographers (ASMP) and are built into most photographer apps and stock-agency onboarding. Pick one, keep a paper stack in your bag and an e-signature version on your phone, and you’ll never be caught without one.
What This Means for You: A Simple Shoot-Day Habit
Don’t overthink this. Adopt one rule: if a real person or private property is recognizable and there’s any chance of commercial use, get a release before you leave. Signatures are effortless on set and nearly impossible to collect months later when a licensing deal appears.
Practically: keep a default model release and property release ready in two formats, capture the signature the moment you shoot, and store releases alongside the files so any future buyer can be told, honestly, “yes, it’s cleared.” That one habit is the difference between a portfolio you can freely license and one full of images you can only ever admire. Because the right of publicity is state law and high-value or unusual projects carry real money, have an attorney review your standard release and any tricky shoot – it’s a small cost against a very sellable body of work.
Sources & further reading:
- Stanford Copyright & Fair Use – When to Use a Release (Rich Stim)
- Digital Media Law Project (Harvard) – Using the Name or Likeness of Another
- California Civil Code section 3344 – Use of name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness
- American Society of Media Photographers (ASMP) – Releases