Reply #2: It's a tricky question...

[regnaD kciN]

...and your friend (cough) would best be served checking with a lawyer.

I used to assume that, if the face was recognizable, you needed a release, period. However, several photo-business books I've read said that this is not the case if a) the photo was taken in a public place, and b) it is used for editorial rather than commercial purposes. The last part means that, if the photo is going to be used for advertising a product, organization, or individual (say, a political campaign), the subject can veto its use, so that they don't find their likeness being used to endorse someone or something they don't support.

The question would be, then, whether someone could convince a judge that a book constituted commercial rather than editorial use -- I suspect this would be tricky, but only a competent lawyer could give a definitive answer.

Of course, since the procedures involved in preparing for a lawsuit can be as lengthy, expensive, and wearying as the trial itself, your friend (cough) might want to ask himself (cough) whether a) any of the subjects would be likely to see this as a way to "easy money," and b) whether they have more resources to draw this out than your friend (cough). In most cases, I would think these are mutually-contradictory matters -- in other words, if your friend (cough) has enough money to make it worthwhile for a subject to sue him (cough), he (cough) probably has enough money to drag out the proceedings longer than the subject could stand; conversely, if he (cough) doesn't have enough money to keep a lawsuit defense going through the pre-trial period, he (cough) probably doesn't have enough to make it worthwhile for the subject to sue in the first place.