HELP - Does anyone have an answer on this very grey area?

LibraSnake · 13-02-2008, 22:44

I was having a chat with one of the regulars in my parents pub the other day and he asked this question...

"Why is it that a complete stranger can take a photograph of you and without any kind of permission publish it on internet sites such as facebook?"

It stemmed from that I took some pictures of the Millwall RFC Veterans when they came in for breakfast, and then I posted them on facebook so they could all see them as I saw it as the easiest way. I showed the guy mentioned above the pics as he hadn't seen them yet and he asked me to remove the one of him cos he didn't like it and was not happy about not being previously informed that they were going online. I naturally assumed that in this day and age he would know that would happen.

It is a very small percentage of people that feel this way, else I would have to go round thousands of people at gigs when I take a big crowd shot LOL.

I think the question is of rights... rights of the subject and the rights of the photographer... I did bring up the paparazzi and the fact that they take and publish pics of people without their permission and he pointed out that he thought they were the scum of the earth LOL

I hope some of you can clear up this matter as he is really interested to know.

Thanks guys

silkstone · 13-02-2008, 22:58

There was a discussion here about photography, copyright, the law and everything quite recently...

Clarify the laws surrounding photography in public places

PeteT · 13-02-2008, 23:02

This is worth a read :
UK Photographers Rights

AQ · 13-02-2008, 23:15

The February edition of "Digital Camera" magazine has an article on Photography and the Law that you may find interesting. I had a quick look through it and cannot find a specific answer to your question.

LibraSnake · 13-02-2008, 23:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by silkstone

There was a discussion here about photography, copyright, the law and everything quite recently...

Clarify the laws surrounding photography in public places

Not quite what I was after, but very very useful
TA

LibraSnake · 14-02-2008, 13:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthraquinone

The February edition of "Digital Camera" magazine has an article on Photography and the Law that you may find interesting. I had a quick look through it and cannot find a specific answer to your question.

Yeah I got that one too
cheers

orangepeel · 14-02-2008, 13:45

The question is whether or not you had permission to take the photos. Assuming you did, what you do with them afterwards is entirely up to yourself I'd have thought. Assuming, of course, you own the rights to them.

***Steve*** · 14-02-2008, 13:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by LibraSnake

It stemmed from that I took some pictures of the Millwall RFC Veterans when they came in for breakfast,

If that was on private property and without explicit written permission then you had no right. If it was with permission or on public property, then you did.

Does that answer your question?

fionaB · 14-02-2008, 15:02

one thing to remember is even scotland and england have different rules..... for example you have a right to roam here, which is the right to use the countryside and land ( not peoples gardens lol) for educational recreational and certain commercial reasons..... so there is a grey area to where photography comes into as well..........
but as Steve says if its taken in a public place where there is no expectation of privacy then you have no problems.
IF however its in a place where say only a select few were invited in a private house or function suite then there IS an expectation of privacy,,,,,,, you would be on dodgy ground then

Les Meehan · 14-02-2008, 16:56

In this case, another point that is of importance is the opinion of the person portrayed in the photo. As here, if someone does not like the picture and asks you not to use it them they have withdrawn any explicit or implied permission and so you cannot use the image for anything and might as well trash it.

Remember permission can be given but it can also be withdrawn.

One big problem is knowing what is and is not a 'public' place.

LibraSnake · 15-02-2008, 15:23

All comments are really helping a lot.
Thanks guys.

At the time he knew I had the camera and knew I took the shot. He said that if I had mentioned at the time that the pics were probably gonna go up on a site such as facebook then he would probably had no problem, but that I put the pics up and then showed him is what he had a problem with.
He said if they were only going on the Millwall RFC website than that was a different matter as he would expect that being a member of the club.

The general question is where he stands as the subject of a photo.

I take loads of pics at punk gigs of the bands and sometimes of the audience (good to get shots of people enjoying themselves) and never had anyone come up to me and ask that a pic of them be deleted after it was taken, or removed after it has been posted in my blog.
If I get the chance I try and show people what I took on the camera at the show to see if they like them... majority of people ask if they can be sent the pics.

As I said the subject is a bit of a grey area.

fionaB · 15-02-2008, 16:44

im not sure i see it as a grey area, if he said he would have been happy for them to go on one web site there is no difference between one web site and ten web sites,.you have permission to publish them on the net. IF he knew u were taking the shot as u said then i dont see how he can pick and choose, remember the copyright of the image is YOURS not his, and until he pays u for useage and rights then he has no say over what u can use it for.

Les Meehan · 15-02-2008, 16:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by fionaB

IF he knew u were taking the shot as u said then i dont see how he can pick and choose, remember the copyright of the image is YOURS not his, and until he pays u for useage and rights then he has no say over what u can use it for.

I don't think this is correct Fi. Just because a photographer owns the copyright of an image DOES NOT necessarily give them the right to publish that image, especially if it contains a 'recognizable image of a person'. This is why release forms are used, the tog owns the copyright but still requires permission from the 'model/subject' to use it in a 'public' arena such as the net or even for that matter in a portfolio since this is a form of publishing for display to third parties.