2257 question - GoFuckYourself.com

mkx · 10-22-2007, 07:28 PM

Would problems arise if your only 2257 documentation is a picture or video of the girl holding her identification up, and a picture / scan of the identification? Or is paperwork and a model release necessary. If it's legit, but you don't have the model release, yet the girl knows she is being filmed, could there be problems in the future if the girl claims she didn't agree to be filmed? Would these problems be civil or criminal?

Hope some of you can share your opinions and experience on this matter.

aico · 10-22-2007, 07:31 PM

It started out as a 2257 question then turned into a legal one. Yes, there can be great problems in the future, to answer your question. You need a model release, always.

mkx · 10-22-2007, 07:33 PM

Civil or criminal?

Yah it didn't give me a chance to edit the title.

halfpint · 10-22-2007, 07:33 PM

Yep even over here in the UK you need a model release form and that also counts for non nude pics

aico · 10-22-2007, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkx

Civil or criminal?

Yah it didn't give me a chance to edit the title.

without a model release you can't legally use the photos, because the model has not released them to you for use. You can take all the photos you want without a model release, you just can't legally use them.

After Shock Media · 10-22-2007, 07:36 PM

Technically you need all of her real names, alias's, stage names, so forth in paperwork form.

Civil wise, no release = possible usage lawsuit.

mkx · 10-22-2007, 07:40 PM

well what if civilly there was nothing to worry about, could there be criminal liabilities?

aico · 10-22-2007, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkx

well what if civilly there was nothing to worry about, could there be criminal liabilities?

with no release it is impossible for there to be "civilly" nothing to worry about.

you are also not meeting the requirements for 2257. Model release documents the names and the date of the shoot, so that you aren't shoot girls when they are 16 and then using those photos two years later when their IDs state they are 18.

After Shock Media · 10-22-2007, 07:51 PM

You need to meet the paperwork requirements some of which are.

Current name, married names, sur names, stage names, any aliases used.
Cross refferencing of all material of her you are using.
Date of the shoot built into the other cross refferencing.
So forth.

mkx · 10-22-2007, 08:32 PM

I see, while if the girl holds up her drivers lic on video b4 you do the shoot then i am just trying to make sure that it will be rare that a court is going to convict criminal charges since proof that the girl is over 18 at the time of shoot is there, just in a different method.

madleinx · 10-22-2007, 10:15 PM

You don't need a model release for 2257. You do need one in case she ever decides to claim that you filmed her without permission.

mkx · 10-23-2007, 10:32 AM

and of course if she claims you filmed her without permission it would only be a civil issue, not criminal right?

10-22-2007, 07:28 PM	#1
mkx Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Toronto Posts: 4,001	2257 question Would problems arise if your only 2257 documentation is a picture or video of the girl holding her identification up, and a picture / scan of the identification? Or is paperwork and a model release necessary. If it's legit, but you don't have the model release, yet the girl knows she is being filmed, could there be problems in the future if the girl claims she didn't agree to be filmed? Would these problems be civil or criminal? Hope some of you can share your opinions and experience on this matter.

10-22-2007, 07:33 PM	#4
halfpint GFY's Halfpint Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: UK Posts: 15,223	Yep even over here in the UK you need a model release form and that also counts for non nude pics __________________ Get FREE website listings on Cryptocoinshops.net

10-22-2007, 07:36 PM	#6
After Shock Media It's coming look busy Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn". Posts: 35,299	Technically you need all of her real names, alias's, stage names, so forth in paperwork form. Civil wise, no release = possible usage lawsuit. __________________ [email protected] ICQ:135982156 AIM: Aftershockmed1a MSN: [email protected]

10-22-2007, 07:51 PM	#9
After Shock Media It's coming look busy Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn". Posts: 35,299	You need to meet the paperwork requirements some of which are. Current name, married names, sur names, stage names, any aliases used. Cross refferencing of all material of her you are using. Date of the shoot built into the other cross refferencing. So forth. __________________ [email protected] ICQ:135982156 AIM: Aftershockmed1a MSN: [email protected]

10-22-2007, 07:31 PM	#2
aico Moo Moo Cow Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Washington State Posts: 14,748	It started out as a 2257 question then turned into a legal one. Yes, there can be great problems in the future, to answer your question. You need a model release, always.

10-22-2007, 07:40 PM	#7
mkx Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Toronto Posts: 4,001	well what if civilly there was nothing to worry about, could there be criminal liabilities?

10-22-2007, 08:32 PM	#10
mkx Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Toronto Posts: 4,001	I see, while if the girl holds up her drivers lic on video b4 you do the shoot then i am just trying to make sure that it will be rare that a court is going to convict criminal charges since proof that the girl is over 18 at the time of shoot is there, just in a different method.

10-22-2007, 10:15 PM	#11
madleinx Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Refugee Posts: 102	You don't need a model release for 2257. You do need one in case she ever decides to claim that you filmed her without permission.

10-23-2007, 10:32 AM	#12
mkx Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Toronto Posts: 4,001	and of course if she claims you filmed her without permission it would only be a civil issue, not criminal right?