So yesterday I get a message that one of my shots featuring a model was used in a federal political ad shown on tv over the week-end. The video was on youtube but has since been pulled. I thought this was rather ironic since the model in question has never endorsed the views of that party and is rather a militant for the Bloc and has been for years. What bugged me about this is that looking at the licensing agreements, this is one of the prohibited uses of an image unless, in Istock’s case, you do write somewhere that the photos are used as illustrations and do not represent the views of the models — which wasn’t done in this case. The other agencies, such as Shutterstock, state more firmly that the use of model released photos for something that could suggest Political endorsement is directly a license infringement. So how many designers and production outlets actually read the agreement before using the shots? Maybe the ad wasn’t considered as something that could suggest that the models were endorsing the Liberal party? That probably was the case, since all it did was illustrate certain types of Quebec demographics. Maybe it was pulled because they weren’t sure if it had crossed the line or not.
In any case, it was still nice to know that one of my shots was selected above all the others as emblematic of the ordinary Quebec senior man conscious of his environment. I’m getting good at this 🙂
The photo in question:
UPDATE! well, incredibly enough, a couple of days after the ad was pulled, they released a new version of it replacing the above shot by ANOTHER shot of mine. This is the one I saw wednesday-thursday: