our rights

I don't have enough knowledge to translate the legal terms of the French article, and I'm therefore afraid to write something stupid (which I'm not immune to in French even though I know the right words).  

Therefore, this is below a simple translation of the French article for your information.  I hope that it will be sufficient to be on the same page when talking about our rights.

Far be it from me to pass here for a lawyer or even a specialist in the matter.

However, I think that it is useful here to lay a few bases on the different types of rights related to photography - yours like mine elsewhere. Let us therefore try to clarify certain points without necessarily entering too much in the details ...

To indicate more precisely who benefits from these rights, I will legend the points as follows:

¹: Photographer's right

²: model right

³: Other parts

To be clear, one right for one of the parties often constitutes an obligation for the other party - I will try to best indicate how this obligation must materialize in real life.

Copyright ¹ ³

Any work of the mind (a painting, a photo, the articles on this site, etc.) is protected by default by copyright. This right allows me to keep control over my photographs.

By default therefore, that is to say without needing to deposit them with an organization or to put a particular mention, no one has the right to reproduce, distribute, use or modify the photos of This site without my authorization.

Creative Commons licences

Like many others, I decided to specify the terms of sharing via a free licence which allows you a certain freedom but which in no way reduces my rights. I just allow you to share these photos identically.

The terms of the licence in general

Paternity: your name or pseudonym must appear with the photo. This option is present in all contracts.

No modification of the image: this prohibits the modifications of the image. (as much to be clear)

No commercial use: this prohibits the image to be used on paid media (books, books, paid videos, etc.)

Sharing identical to the initial conditions: someone who would modify the photo (having obtained my prior agreement) must share it necessarily under the same Creative Commons licence. This prevents her from going under "complete copyright".

In my case:

The photographs are presented under the terms of the international licence 4.0 Creative commons summarized here: "Assignment [= Photo credits] - no commercial use - no modification". In no case can they be considered free of law.

Consequently, the licence mentioned above does not give you the permissions necessary for use other than sharing by crediting the author. In addition, certain rights such as moral rights, personal data law and image law are likely to limit your use specially when the main subject of the photo is a person.

So thank you for contacting me if you want to get out of the framework of this licence.

This is the text indicated below each page of this site - that is to say if it is important

What about the use of photos or concepts belonging to others

in tribute

All product names, logos and brands are the property of their respective holders. All names of companies, products and services are used on this website for identification purposes only. The use of these names, logos and brands does not imply any promotion.

This mention applies particularly to the Body Painting series whose super heroes are theme. This is a tribute made by a fan ... In no case is there any commercial will behind this.

looking for inspiration

To illustrate certain moodboarding, I have little choice but to show you examples of photos taken by other photographers (I try to choose talent people). My main problem is that I save the photo in my smartphone and that I do not know who to assign it then ...

I systematically indicate that it comes from the internet and that the photo is not from me (a little ultimately in the way of a DR) and it is with pleasure that I will credit these photos if the photographer recognizes himself.

I really apologize to the photographers who would feel (right) deprived of their rights, it is never a clean will but a poor organization on my part.

Heritage law ¹

This term takes up all the financial rights linked to the photos. This right belongs exclusively to the photographer and not to the order. It includes two components requiring the author's written authorization:

The right of representation: communication of his work to the public (exhibition, website, etc.);

The right of reproduction (fixing of its work on a support allowing it to be communicated to the public: edition, display, online sales platform ...).

Failure to comply with this rule constitutes an offense of counterfeiting.

100% of my photo sessions are made as part of a collaboration (so I do not receive money on these sessions) but this right can however be applied in the event that commercial use is made by a third party.

Image law ²

There is no general legal provision applicable to the authorization given by a person to photograph them.

In many situations, including public events, a photographer is free to photograph a person: it is the right to freedom of expression. Persons photographed are not protected by intellectual property rights.

However, a photographer is not free to use the image as he sees fit. The subject has the right to image (his image has an economic value and he has the right to exploit his own image) and the right to respect for his private life: he has the right to oppose the use commercial or public dissemination of its image.

Right to repent ¹ ²

Right to repent the photographer

The photographer who has concluded a contract for the sale of his heritage rights may come back to his decision provided that compensation for the damage caused by this repentance. This is "the right to repent or withdraw".

Right to repent of the model

at home in particular

By default, I let you the right to ask me to withdraw the photographs (for those who have signed a contract with me, you know that there is a clause about it.

However, if you decide to use this right, it is understood that you must apply it too and that, without there being any discussion or any doubt about it, you also give up on your right to use these photos in any way ...

Even if it deeply annoys me to remove photos, this right (which is usually mainly used for more intimate images) can be used even for photos that I would qualify traditional ... But why then?

more generally - nudes photos

Different circumstances can lead people to expose themselves to the objective of their life companion or even in front of a photographer.

Whether or not to be a model, a model or actress, professional or amateur ... Everyone benefits under the protection of their privacy, especially when it comes to their intimacy, extensive protection.

And, no, even if a prosecutor wrote the opposite to you, it is not enough that you agreed to pose before the objective so that you no longer have the possibility of exercising appeals and/or rights Against those who exploit your image without your agreement.

Two cases are to be distinguished:

The photos or videos are taken and/or reproduced and/or broadcast on the Internet without the agreement of the victim;

The photos or videos are taken and/or broadcast on the internet with the agreement of the victim.

In the first case, there is no discussion, a photo or a video of a woman or an ex-girlfriend, naked or dressed or in undressed outfit, put on the Internet, is an attack on life Private: it is enough that the photographed person has not expressed their agreement for taking the photo and/or for its dissemination so that they can continue any unauthorized exploitation of their image.

I draw your attention to the fact that you always give your fire for photos from pictures.

In the second case, it is necessary to assess as a case case: it depends whether there is an abuse in the operation of the image or not.

And there are very often abuses:

either because the operator has exceeded the limits of the authorization or agreement which had been given by the model;

Either because the contract or document which justifies the rights of exploitation of the image is illegal, irregular or tainted with nullity or a lap.

In any event, after a certain time and according to the circumstances of her life changes, the model / actress / model having posed naked (e) can notably assert her "right to repentance".

She can therefore request the deletion of erotic or pornographic photos or videos, under certain conditions. It is a kind of "right to be forgotten" (the term is unfit legally but quite speaking ...).

On this legal basis, the withdrawal of video or porn or erotic or artistic naked photo can be pronounced, including by court decision even so often an agreement is possible and negotiable.

As such, it must be understood that matter is not locked in written rules, but in an appreciation made sovereignly by justice.