Reference Glossary
Model release
A signed document in which an identifiable person in a photo or video grants permission for their likeness to be used commercially, protecting the publisher against right-of-publicity or privacy claims.
Why it matters in a DAM
A DAM needs model release status as its own filterable field because it's legally distinct from copyright clearance — owning or licensing the rights to a photograph does not automatically permit using a recognizable person's likeness in advertising, which is exactly why stock libraries mark images 'editorial use only' specifically when no release was obtained. Teams that only check whether an image is licensed, without checking release status separately, are the ones who end up using an editorial-only image in a paid ad and face a right-of-publicity claim from the person pictured.
A worked example
Common mistake
Confusing 'licensed to use the photo' (copyright clearance) with 'cleared to use the person's likeness commercially' (model release). A team licenses a stock photo for an ad campaign, not realizing the specific image is marked editorial-only because it lacks a release, and faces a right-of-publicity claim from the person pictured.
A model release addresses a legal question separate from copyright entirely: copyright governs who owns or can license the photograph as a creative work, while a model release governs whether the identifiable person in that photograph has consented to their likeness being used, particularly for commercial or advertising purposes. In most jurisdictions, using a recognizable person’s image in a way that implies endorsement or is used commercially without their consent can expose the publisher to right-of-publicity or privacy claims, independent of whether the photographer or agency properly licensed the image itself.
This is why stock photo libraries distinguish ‘editorial use’ images — usable in news, commentary, or non-commercial contexts without a release — from ‘commercial use’ images backed by a signed release from every identifiable person and, where relevant, every recognizable trademarked or private property in frame. The distinction isn’t cosmetic: an editorial-only image used in a paid advertisement is a release problem even if the licensing fee was paid correctly and the copyright is entirely in order.
For a DAM, this means model release status needs to be its own structured, filterable field — release signed yes/no, a link to the signed document, and ideally which specific subjects in a multi-person photo are covered — rather than being inferred from the general license type. A photo with three people where only two signed releases is a common real scenario, and a DAM that can’t express partial release coverage forces someone to make a manual, error-prone judgment call every time that asset is reused.
Frequently asked
What is a model release?
A signed document in which an identifiable person in a photo or video grants permission for their likeness to be used commercially, protecting the publisher against right-of-publicity or privacy claims.
Why does a DAM need model release status as its own field, separate from copyright?
Because it's legally distinct from copyright clearance — owning or licensing the rights to a photograph does not automatically permit using a recognizable person's likeness in advertising, which is exactly why stock libraries mark images 'editorial use only' specifically when no release was obtained.
What happens to teams that only check licensing status, not release status?
They're the ones who end up using an editorial-only image in a paid ad and face a right-of-publicity claim from the person pictured, because they checked whether the image was licensed but not whether it was cleared for commercial use of the person's likeness.
What's the specific mistake described around model releases?
Confusing 'licensed to use the photo' (copyright clearance) with 'cleared to use the person's likeness commercially' (model release) — a team licenses a stock photo for an ad campaign, not realizing the specific image is marked editorial-only because it lacks a release.
What does editorial use only signal about an image's model release status?
It signals that no model release was obtained for the identifiable person in the image, so the image can be used in editorial or news contexts but not in advertising or other commercial use without additional clearance.
Is model release status the same thing as usage rights?
No — usage rights govern channel, geography, and duration for the licensed asset generally, while model release is a separate legal clearance specifically for using an identifiable person's likeness commercially, and a DAM needs to track both independently.