Property Release for a Waterfall?

I am posting a waterfall image to my gallery. It is of a privately owned waterfall of a historically registered landmark. There are no logos or anything, but the owner would easily recognize it if he saw it.

I'm not a lawyer, but I believe the release only comes into issue if you are profiting off of it

I have always practiced the age old principle of "better safe than sorry" but with that said. If you are on public land it is well within your legal rights to take a photograph of what is plainly visible whether it is on private land or not unless otherwise stated. Of course there are always exception to all rules but not in this case of being able to see a waterfall on private land from a public viewing point.

If interested here is some additional info on Photographers Rights

Brad makes a great point which I forgot about

So what if Brad wants to SELL his photograph of the privately owned waterfall taken in plain view on public land?

So what if Brad wants to SELL his photograph of the privately owned waterfall taken in plain view on public land?

As far as I understand it, if you take a photo of private property from a public area and then sell the photo for monetary gain, one should have a release from the owner. Also, let's say you photograph someone's house from a public street. If you publish the photograph and/ or sell the photograph, you could (possibly) be in violation of property rights and right-to-privacy laws. If one throws in the concept of 'newsworthy' photography, things become quite grey.

In light of this, I think Brad M's suggestion to play it safe and obtain a release is good advice.

--P

Thanks for the replies. The waterfall is only visible from private property. I paid to enter the grounds and photography is allowed and even encouraged. The owner has a Flickr group that I shared the photos on. He has seen them and commented on them. He asked if he could use them on his website, and I granted permission to use them on his website, but told him if he wanted to sell prints, I'd expect royalties. He didn't reply after that. My purpose of asking about a release is in case I want to profit from it. It is a historically registered landmark as well. I'm not sure if that clears anything up.

Our rule of thumb is "When in doubt, release." The hassle in getting the release is miniscule compared to that of needing a release and not having it after the sale has transpired.

Here's another insight- Anyone that refuses to give you the release is very likely the same person that will peel your hide if you sell the photo without a release.

Don't know if this helps any, here is a link I found about photography laws/rights...

http://content.photojojo.com/tips/legal-rights-of-photographers/