I saw those also and wondered if that was considered a commercial which would might make the children actors? Then you get into child working labor laws. Just throwing that out there.
Nancy
depends on how it was done. if they took footage from a museum visit (even if the intent the whole time was to use it in a commercial) then it likely would'nt fall under "acting" and the associated child labor laws. this is why it's very important for any person who is filmed or photographed in a manner that entails a written release to ensure what the extent or limitations of use entail. a person can sign off believing that they/their child's image will only be used for certain purposes but that release can legaly permit the owner (or whomever they choose to lease or sell to) a wide range of usage.
a co-worker of mine learned this the hard way when our employer hired a p.r. firm and took photos at a company picnic (supposedly just for in house calendars and staff materials)-she signed a release with reading it completly only to see her dd's photo used on billboards and bus signs around the county we worked for soliciting adoption and foster homes "for kids like me"
