Question for Paul, JS

[brmill26]

Or anyone else who may have experience. The general question is this: when I'm shooting a major, professional race event, do I need permission from the rights owner (sanctioning body or series owners or whomever) in order to sell those photos on the internet as part of my own art?

In context, last weekend I shot the Grand-Am Rolex series race at Barber. I was not official media, nor do I intend to sell to any editorial entity. I want to be able to offer some images for sale as prints on a web site available to the public. Do I need permission? I've also shot AMA Supercross as well, in which I'm worried not only about the series' rights, but the publicity rights of the individual riders as well (though I'm not the least bit worried a/b them coming after me).

I know both of you shoot races, and in particular Paul, knowing F1, I'm sure they're quite strict with this sort of stuff, so I figured you might know. Thanks for your help!

[SmartWombat]

The US law and franchising is so different that I wouldn't comment on that.

The legal position for F1 and what is enforced is very different.
Definitely using the trademarked logo is out !
"(vii) (a) neither the Accredited Party nor the Pass Holder shall use (or cause or permit to be used) any logos and/or trade marks of or relating to the FIA Formula One World Championship (including but not limited to the expressions "Formula One", "Formula 1", "F1" and "FIA Formula One World Championship" and their non-English language versions) other than in a factually accurate narrative context (and for the avoidance of doubt for no commercial purposes whatsoever) unless and to the extent that the express consent of Formula One Administration Limited has first been obtained in writing;
(b) neither the Accredited party nor the Pass Holder shall use (or cause or permit to be used) any name, title or logo of or pertaining to the FIA or to any participant in the FIA Formula One World Championship unless and to the extent that all clearances and consents have first been obtained in writing from the FIA and/or any appropriate third party."

But there are many many websites using F1 in their names.
I think that enforcing the use of the letter F and the number 1 has proved a huge task.


In the accreditation rules:
"the Accredited Party and the Pass Holder may only originate still pictures for editorial use in the print media or on the Internet;"
and
"the Accredited Party and the Pass Holder shall be solely responsible for obtaining all necessary third party consents for the non-editorial use of still pictures"

That I think is the key one, basically it says that the usual photo releases are required.
So do you need permission?
As much as you would if it wasn't F1.

[JSPhoto]

In the US you not only have to worry about the sanctioning body but also the drivers and or teams. Tony Stewart I know has sued people and won for producing and selling items and or photos and the legal ins and outs can spin a good lawyers head. Your actually better off selling to media, but it can still bite you in the end one way or another.

Nice timing on this, I read my credntial last night and NASCAR owns all the images and can use any of them they want, as can Indianapolis Motor Speedway, and I am shooting for a newspaper.

You really have to check with the sanctioning body and the drivers/teams and see what their policies are, most teams relish the advertising, while some may want a cut of the take!

JS

[brmill26]

Excellent information! I knew you guys would be the ones to ask. I've been looking for that info all over the place and haven't found anything useful - even on Grand-Am's website. Thanks to law school I had some idea that there'd be different owners' rights interests, but I didn't quite expect it to be that strict. It doesn't surprise me either, though.

That's definitely exactly what I was looking for, and now I know I definitely will not be putting any of those race images up for sale to the public!

[JSPhoto]

Excellent information! I knew you guys would be the ones to ask. I've been looking for that info all over the place and haven't found anything useful - even on Grand-Am's website. Thanks to law school I had some idea that there'd be different owners' rights interests, but I didn't quite expect it to be that strict. It doesn't surprise me either, though.

That's definitely exactly what I was looking for, and now I know I definitely will not be putting any of those race images up for sale to the public!

Your best bet is to call the sanctioning body and speak directly to them, you might find they are willing to work something out.

JS

[steelerdirtfreak]

...Tony Stewart I know has sued people and won for producing and selling items and or photos and the legal ins and outs can spin a good lawyers head...

JS

Do you know if that would apply to photos of him when he is racing at local short tracks in his late model or sprint car?

[JSPhoto]

I don't know exactly what all was invovled in the suit, I just know there were "photos" and a photographer.
Of course Tony's stock dropped a ton last Thursday night following the incident at ORPI with the two USAC officials.

JS

[brmill26]

Thanks, JS. Grand-Am is run by Daytona Motorsports Group (DMG), which is simply NASCAR by another name. I'll not waste my time with them. I wouldn't figure on more than a handful of sales. I could probably get away with it under the radar, but on the other hand the (potential) consequences of getting caught aren't good, especially the Bar's Character & Fitness Committee review coming up.

Steeler - as far as the cars go, the rights would be different per each series. As far as Tony himself, he owns the rights to his own publicity, so that would not change. However, I *think* I recall a case where a race car scheme was adjudged to be an "identifiable person," and therefore requires a release - but I'm not sure on that. Your safest bet, as always, is not to sell them unless you have explicit permission. Anything else is in the gray.