About Editorial Use Images

What are "editorial use images"?
Editorial-use images are generally images of recognizable people that are newsworthy for some reason and that do not have model releases.

Typically, all our images of recognizable people have model releases. But editorial images are not released, and they are legally acceptable to use for what the law calls 'editorial uses' such as editorializing, news, social commentary (check with your attorneys regarding the law and your particular use to be sure).

These photos are normally taken in public places, and do not invade the personal privacy of the person(s) in the image since they are taken in public. Images like this can be legally used for commentary and newsworthy purposes such as public interest commentary, news reporting, criticism of social, news worthy, and/or cultural issues, and parody. U.S. law allows photographers to take photos of people in public places without the need for a model release, as long as there is no posted notice prohibiting it. Agents like BigStockPhoto can sell these images, as long as they are taken in a public place and downloaders can use those images for "editorial" uses listed above.

Examples of editorial images:

• newsworthy events or occurances
• live sports and music events
• street scenes
• celebrities
• news or social events
• cultural events

Commercial, trade, promotional and advertising uses are generally not permitted with editorial-use images.
You should not use the images for reasons other than personal use/study, cultural commentary, political or newsworthy commentary, satire, or criticism. Using the image to sell a soft drink or other product - or as a product (calendar, tshirt, mug, etc.) would not be allowed without a model released image. Typically, editorial use images are used in magazines, newspapers, etc. where commentary, news, or critique is being made.

Can't I use any image on BigStockPhoto for editorial use?
Yes, you can use any image on this site for editorial purposes. The important thing is to understand how you can use a non-model released image of a recognizable person properly, as editorial use.

Then why are some images label "editorial use only"?
Because the images are of recognizable people, but we do not have model releases for the images. Normally we require model releases for images where you can clearly see the person's face - but editorial use images do no require these model releases. These non-released images are suitable for editorial uses, but not for other commercial uses.

Can I do anything I want with an editorial image?
No, you can't do things listed in the Image Usage Agreement as prohibited or legally prohibited such as libel or slander. But you can use the images for personal use or for editorial use contexts which generally include news, reporting, social or cultural commentary or criticism, etc.

The main restriction as far as editorial or any use of images of people is to be sure you are not denegrating or defaming the person in the image. There are instances that might be legally allowable that the person in the image may not like, such as using an overweight person for a commentary on over eating in America. These uses may be legal, but nobody can guarantee they won't upset the person in the photo, who could decide to seek legal action against you, for right or wrong, because they feel harmed by your use.

As the image user and downloader, you need to be aware of legal considerations that surround editorial usages. When using or submitting editorial images, you are solely responsible for any claims related to or arising from the images or any use of the images.

I am a photographer/contributor:

Important Note: ALL Editorial Use images MUST include:

• a clear DESCRIPTION of the image (Who is it? What's happening?)
• the DATE
• and the PLACE

...that the image was taken. Editorial use images without that information will not be accepted.

Do I need to upload model releases any more? Or can I skip it now?
Definitely upload the model releases as you normally do if you have them. That way buyers can use your images for most any purpose. If you do NOT have a release, and the image is commentary worthy, or newsworthy in some way, we can now sell the image for editorial use only. Generally, studio shots are not news/commentary worthy and need releases. Editorial, non-released images are taken in public during interesting events or happenings mainly.

What is newsworthy or commentary worthy? How do you define it?
Current photos of interesting people and events are the best example. However there is a subjective area that we reserve the right to decide on as needed. For instance, a can of Pepsi could be used in a news story about soft drinks. Bottom line is that interesting shots will be accepted, while non-interesting shots may be rejected more often.

Can I upload photos taken at live music or sporting events?
If there is no restriction at the venue to taking photos of the events, it should be fine for editorial use.

If I lose my model release for a studio shoot, can I upload the images as 'Editorial Use'?
No. Editorial use images are newsworthy images taken in public places generally of newsworthy events. Images of non-newsworthy events or non-commentary worthy subject matter will not be approved if submitted for editorial use.

What about logos? You had a rule where we couldn't submit images with plainly visible logos before... can I do that now?
You can now submit editorial-use images of basically anything and everything, including images with logos like a Fed Ex truck, as long as it's really an editorial use subject - something that a person might want to write about, or comment on.

What about trademarked or copyrighted items such as artwork? You had a rule before saying we couldn't submit modern artworks before since they are copyrighted by the artist... can I do that now?
You can now submit editorial-use images of basically anything and everything, including images of copyrighted artwork. We label it as "editorial use" and alert the downloader. It's perfectly legal to take a photo of something on public display like artwork, copyrighted or not, and editorialize/comment about it. It's part of free speech and fair use law. We don't supply these images for downloaders to misuse - but for purposes of commentary, it's fine.

More information on editorial use can be found here:

PhotoAttorney: Commercial vs. Editorial Use

Video Interview with Edward Greenberg, noted legal expert on Editorial Image Use