34 thoughts on “Well, This Is Awkward

  1. David

    They allowed a stock-photo agency to have their photo; it’s their own fault. They can be as appalled as they like but they took the money.

    (This does not mean that I agree with the sentiments in the poster)

    1. Owen

      Yep. Also, they don’t live here so it’s really not a massive concern of theirs. Nor are they that recognisable.

    2. MajorThrill

      There can be conditions assigned to stock photography however. For example, from iStockPhoto.com’s terms of use (Section 2 in particular would cover this.):

      “If any Content featuring a model or property is used in connection with a subject that would be unflattering or unduly controversial to a reasonable person, you must accompany each such use with a statement adjacent to the Content that indicates that: (i) the Content is being used for illustrative purposes only; and (ii) any person depicted in the Content, if any, is a model, unless the Content itself clearly and undisputedly reflects the model or person in such potentially sensitive subject matter in which case the Content may be used or displayed in a manner that portrays the model or person in the same context and to the same degree depicted in the Content itself;”

      That’s just one stock photography site, there are many and probably have variations on this theme. I am not a lawyer, coffee drinking or otherwise so take all this with a liberal pinch of salt.

      1. LiamZero

        The poster does have something to the effect that it’s posed by models in small print so, as much as it pains me to say, they’ve done everything by the book on this one.
        (Also, vote Yes)

        1. MajorThrill

          Plus the specific site they got the photo from doesn’t appear to have any such limitations in the license agreement.

  2. Jeff

    What a weird horrible world we live in where people who get paid to pose for a stock photo agency then see their photo used in contexts they don’t approve of. If you are afraid of this happening, don’t sign up for a stock photo agency.

    1. newsjustin

      Its almost as if people don’t understand how stock-photography or advertising works. Really idiotic to cry about its use after signing on the dotted line and (presumably) taking the cash.

  3. Don McMahan

    they signed a model waiver for the photographer so, no they cannot control who uses the photo, but they can do just what they are doing, speak out on the issue and well done to them for that. one other thing they might do is find out if the no campaigners who put up the poster actually bought the photo.

  4. D

    I’d be shocked if it’s not being used with their permission. It’s likely they gave that permission when the photo was taken, clearly they just didn’t realise it.

  5. Pol

    Would someone please explain to Mr Hill how stock photos work. I suggest using the Friends episode where Joey can’t get a date after his photo is used in an STD poster as a teaching tool.

  6. Sheila

    I had a feeling the people in this photo would find out what their image ended up being used for (and most likely not like it’s purpose).

  7. All the good ones fly south for winter

    They specifically ask for it to be used only on stuff they were cool with!

  8. Odis

    How much money were you paid?
    Was it in silver coinage?
    What did you spend it on?

    1. Medium Sized C

      Are you doing the “where is your silver” play on people who participated in a photo for stock images?

  9. Dirmius

    They could do a free shoot in support of Yes. The other side could stick up posters with the exact same models beneath the No ones. You know, for equality.

  10. St. John Smythe

    Didn’t someone on here try to imply that because the LOOKED kinda Eastern European, that they were probably in agreement with the social politics of the no voters?

  11. Spaghetti Hoop

    Mr. Hills needs to check both the model release(s) and the license agreement. There ARE controls around the use of stock imagery in divisive campaigns – but that all depends on the terms for this usage and what the models signed on their release. I suggest he writes to the purchasers of the licence and asks the question, which is a perfectly reasonable one.

    1. Stewart Curry

      I’m sure the Mothers & Fathers Matter people will deal with this whole issue in a sane and rational matter…

    1. Sheila

      Adam Hills wife knows them.

      I thought the same, when I checked it turns out Mansfield took a pic of it when in Ireland recently.

  12. jeremy kyle

    It’d be different if this was a random Facebook photo plucked off someone’s page.

  13. Der

    yeah yeah yeah it’s all above board and nothing illegal to see here. However it is interesting that the faces of the no vote on posters across the country believe in voting yes. It certainly become more clear to me that I should ignore these posters as even the people on them do not agree with the message.
    It’s also amusing that the No campaign literally couldn’t find someone who agrees with them to be on their posters.

Comments are closed.