When it comes to the world of photography, many of us already have some inclination that photographers are bound to legal constructs.  If selling or displaying their work for the public to view, photographers may sometimes get caught up in tricky copyright and trademark infringement situations if they are not careful.  And by tricky, I mean sometimes downright nasty.

But most of us do not really contemplate how far the liability goes; is a model liable for a photographer’s legal “slips?”

Models should always tightly hold onto their secret weapon, their golden ticket: a release form.  Release forms are important for both the photographer and the model alike.  The photographer receives the rights to distribute the photograph of the model, while the model sets the terms for how the photo will be distributed.

Let’s say that after a shoot, the photographer combines your image with a copyrighted image that she doesn’t own.  Problem. You are sitting at home drinking a latte and suddenly you are slapped with a copyright infringement claim.  Don’t fret, you have a release form.  Generally, if the photographer uses the images in a way that the model did not authorize, the model is free from liability.  Even more, the model can actually sometimes then sue the photographer as well!  Good deal for the model, not so much for the photographer.

Do you think that a photographer faces too much liability for what may sometimes be an innocent mistake?  Are models too empowered, or do you think that they are afforded their rights appropriately?