Carmen Ribelles wrote:
not sure if i understood it the reason to keep a copy of id. i understand if you want to check im not underage which can b done by showing you my id at the time of shoot, but why need to keep a photo? what protection is there for the model if one day the photographer publishes the nude photos with the model full name or even worse publish them wiht the ID in some website, and later somebody google my full name and can find the nudes, when i wanted to be anonymous. so basically the legal protections are for the photographer but not the model?

You'll need to read the 2257 laws to understand what's happening.
This is not a war between models and photographers, this is war between models PLUS photographers vs. the Federal Government of the United States. The penalties are harsh for non-compliance.

It has been rescinded once and then brought back. There needs to be a more fair and equitable way of resolving this but until there is no photographer in their right mind will risk the potential penalties.

It truly makes life much more difficult for both models AND photographers.

Carmen Ribelles wrote:
not sure if i understood it the reason to keep a copy of id. i understand if you want to check im not underage which can b done by showing you my id at the time of shoot, but why need to keep a photo? what protection is there for the model if one day the photographer publishes the nude photos with the model full name or even worse publish them wiht the ID in some website, and later somebody google my full name and can find the nudes, when i wanted to be anonymous. so basically the legal protections are for the photographer but not the model?

As others have pointed out...

Having a "Stage Name" or "Alias" is generally the norm as far as any type of adult work, or publicly available work involving nudity, is concerned.  But the U.S. Gov't will not allow you to be anonymous when it comes to the behind the scenes records that photographers must keep and that the Gov't has given themselves the right to inspect.

And yes, that inability to remain anonymous from the official records is something that may scare some people away from the business.  So you'll have a decision to make...

Carmen Ribelles wrote:
not sure if i understood it the reason to keep a copy of id. i understand if you want to check im not underage which can b done by showing you my id at the time of shoot, but why need to keep a photo? what protection is there for the model if one day the photographer publishes the nude photos with the model full name or even worse publish them wiht the ID in some website, and later somebody google my full name and can find the nudes, when i wanted to be anonymous. so basically the legal protections are for the photographer but not the model?

For a number of years I have done a headshot of the model holding up her ID to one side of her face, and the signed model release next to the other side. That makes it easy to keep all the records right with the photos. No model has ever objected to that practice. In 2018, when lava was flowing here, I lost EVERY paper model release I had kept for years when all of them were lost during the evacuation. The only signed model releases that I have now from pre-2018 are those I photographed that way.

As for your concerns about your name being associated with your nude photos, you can take care of that worry by adding a clause to every model release you sign stating that your nude photos cannot be be displayed, exhibited, or published in association with your legal name (or even with just your first name). Get the photographer to also sign the release and initial that clause, and also get their agreement to give you a copy of the signed model release.

You can definitely make that very reasonable demand, and refuse to sign a release without that inclusion, and I doubt there would be many photographers who could object to that. It's a reasonable requirement, and would at least permit you to sue any photographer who might violate it,

That said, I think any photographer with any ethics should be happy to protect your privacy in that way.

Candie W wrote:
I use an alias - so I wouldn't understand the need to see my ID.  I always sign a model release and I always print in that I use a model alias.  It definitely gets confusing when it comes to payment and I haven't quite figured out how that is supposed to work.  I know celebs use an alias so I wonder do they just get payment to their media company and then pay themselves???  Maybe that is an option....

Anyhow....

I do not like my ID being photographed at any time - you just can't be too sure these days.  I haven't however did any nudes so my answer may not hold any weight anyway.

Get good local legal advice. And soon.  Before you possibly dig yourself in even deeper legally.

It sounds like you MAY be subject to both criminal charges and civil liability.  You definitely would be in a number of States.  But you really want to get LOCAL expert legal advice as to exactly what the rules are in your State / District.

Most experienced models, etc, will be familiar with entering into a contract using their real legal name.  I.E.  Something like "Jane Janowitz also known as (A.K.A.) Miss (insert professional name) Rebecca Love, hereinafter referred to as Rebecca Love".  Or other equivalents where the person's legal name is incorporated within the contract.

On my preliminary check of some U.S. States, it appears that NOT including your real / legal name, but signing a contract with an assumed name, is a REALLY serious issue legally.  But get LOCAL legal advice instead.  What YOUR lawyer tells you about the law in YOUR State / District is all that counts.

Also ask your lawyer about the civil liabilities if a photographer gets nailed for, or suffers financial losses as a result of not having a model release that you have led him to believe is valid.  Plus are there any issues with using an assumed name in regard to U.S. 2257 record keeping requirements, if you don't do any nude work?  What if it's just something like "implied / topless"?  Get the full legal facts, as issues around 2257 also get really serious (including for the photographer).

I CAN'T EMPHASIZE THIS ENOUGH.  GET PROFESSIONAL LOCAL LEGAL ADVICE.  You're in potentially dangerous legal territory.  But the legal experts in your State / District will sort out for you exactly what's what, before you go any further.

Manfred wrote:
For doing nude and lingerie photoshoots the model needs to be over 18. This is especially important if the photos are used commercially like in your case. Sometimes models are lying about their age. This also once happended to me.

Under 18 models can do lingerie, that is NOT illegal and for a model 18 or older doing lingerie ID is NOT required for that.

Photographer12years wrote:
Under 18 models can do lingerie,

Well . . .

Photographer12years wrote:
for a model 18 or older doing lingerie ID is NOT required for that.

Well . . .

Photographer12years wrote:
that's why sites are hacked, to get your [not mine, the model's?] personal information.

The model's personal information is not on the sites.

Manfred wrote:
For doing nude and lingerie photoshoots the model needs to be over 18. This is especially important if the photos are used commercially like in your case. Sometimes models are lying about their age. This also once happended to me.

A section from the corruption of minors law in Pennsylvania

(d)  Mistake as to age.--

(1)  Whenever in this section the criminality of conduct depends upon the corruption of a minor whose actual age is under 16 years, it is no defense that the actor did not know the age of the minor or reasonably believed the minor to be older than 18 years.

(2)  Whenever in this section the criminality of conduct depends upon the corruption of a minor whose actual age is 16 years or more but less than 18 years, it is a defense for the actor to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he reasonably believed the minor to be 18 years or older.

Photographer12years wrote:
Under 18 models can do lingerie, that is NOT illegal and for a model 18 or older doing lingerie ID is NOT required for that.

Why would you shoot lingerie with anyone under 18?  Or under 21, for that matter?

Do you use shoot contracts, model releases and usage agreements?  At what age does your state allow a person to legally sign a contract?  Why don't you want proof of identity and age when signing a contract? 

You are stating it is not illegal for a 16-18 year old to pose in lingerie, unequivocally.  Any kind of lingerie?  Can you support that with a statute in your state?  Is it always about the clothing or is the pose and expression a potential problem?

Would you take the chance that you could be nailed for violating another law or be enjoined in a lawsuit by the parents or minor to shoot with a 16 year old?

https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/fami … raphy.html


Manzanella v. Zimmerman, have commonly quoted the following in order to describe conduct that involves moral turpitude: “An act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private and social duties which a man owes to his fellow men, or to society in general, contrary to the accepted and customary rule of right and duty between man and man.”

Corruption of minors, though not the primary description of a violation, it can include "While “corrupting the morals of a minor” is not well-defined, generally speaking, these can include actions that would offend common sense and a sense of decency."

Sometimes it doesn't matter if the law allows it, don't involve a minor.

Mark Salo wrote:
The model's personal information is not on the sites.

Well.... actually it is. All of the sites I sell content on require a copy of the id and a copy of the signed 2257 release when uploading. It wasn't always that way, but it is now.

Mark Salo wrote:
The model's personal information is not on the sites.

Model MoRina wrote:
Well.... actually it is. All of the sites I sell content on require a copy of the id and a copy of the signed 2257 release when uploading. It wasn't always that way, but it is now.

Certainly the site management needs that info but are you saying that they publish it publicly?
Are we quibbling about technicalities?

Mark Salo wrote:
Certainly the site management needs that info but are you saying that they publish it publicly?
Are we quibbling about technicalities?

Quibble with you? Never!!!
No, it's not public, but you were responding to someone who talked about sites being hacked. Then all the "private" information becomes not so private.

Carmen Ribelles wrote:
not sure if i understood it the reason to keep a copy of id. i understand if you want to check im not underage which can b done by showing you my id at the time of shoot, but why need to keep a photo? what protection is there for the model if one day the photographer publishes the nude photos with the model full name or even worse publish them wiht the ID in some website, and later somebody google my full name and can find the nudes, when i wanted to be anonymous. so basically the legal protections are for the photographer but not the model?

The photographer needs to see the ID to verify your legal age. The copy kept by the photographer is needed in case the goverment asks to see proof the photographer checked. It a case of, "better have it and not need it, rather than need it and not have it.".

Carmen Ribelles wrote:
question for the US based members. i mostly do nude and lingerie shoots. only 10% of photographers asked me to show them my govt ID so they took a photo and kept it, to which i agreed but didn't like it. i want to ask, is it really necessary to keep the model's ID copy when shooting nudes and lingerie? why?? who do you have to proof to that the model is over 18? i can only think that maybe some photographers use the photos for commercial purposes and post them on some sites that have a requirement to upload the model id for legal reasons??

i would like to know your experience about this. i've worked with many photographers and most didn't even need to see my ID. i don't have any model friends so would like to know if any other models here who don't allow their ID being photographed or if im over reacting.

photographers: do you normally require this?

models: do you normally let photographer take photo of your ID?

I always require it.  It's arguable that 2257 doesn't apply to nude photos that lack sexual content a/k/a "prurient interest," but the way things are going in the USA better safe than sorry.

I've never had a model object to it fwiw.

Photographer12years wrote:
Under 18 models can do lingerie, that is NOT illegal and for a model 18 or older doing lingerie ID is NOT required for that.

It's actually not illegal to have nude pictures of anyone of any age, as long as it isn't sexual in nature.  In crim law we called it the "baby pictures exception."  It's widely abused but in terms of pics of minors it's not the get out of jail free card that it sounds like, since pretty much any jury will find a photo of a minor that isn't obviously innocuous (like your kid in the bathtub) to violate the law.

Again, always get the ID.  You definitely don't want to find yourself arguing uphill against the government on this one, unless you really enjoy jail.