Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/09/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Nope, just tried of the control freaks trying to spoil the good works of others. Don R. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack Herron" <jherron@theriver.com> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 9:23 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] Re- Clementine > Don, > Lighten up already! Kim's posts have been gentle and only suggestive in > manner, and were not the cause of the offence, which, if I recall right, was > largely done by the highly caustic post of Fred Neanderthal (Spelling?), to > include calling the photographer "stupid". > His post, and yours, highly reek of "control" issues, but not her's. > Someone must have pissed in your cornflakes. Kim certainly did not do > anything to justify your post. > Jack > Jack C. Herron > 8118 E. 20th St. > Tucson, AZ 85710 > 520 885-6933 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Don R." <don.ro@verizon.net> > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 6:18 PM > Subject: Re: [Leica] Re- Clementine > > > > Kim: > > > > And what business of yours was it to lecture a specific photographer about > > anything much less legal matters? If you don't have a state bar license I > > seriously doubt your are qualified to give a legal opinion and may be > guilty > > of barristery. > > > > Just the typical "control freak" wanting to control one more human being I > > take it. > > > > If "model release" is an "issue for potential discussion" as you now > say, > > why not give us your dissertation but leave the specific photographer out > of > > it. Then you may ramble on with no harm being done. > > > > Let the specific photographer alone. Let him do his thing. > > > > By the way, where are your Leica photos? > > > > Don R. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: <Teresa299@aol.com> > > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> > > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 7:27 PM > > Subject: Re: [Leica] Re- Clementine > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 9/30/02 4:59:19 PM, gregj.lorenzo@shaw.ca writes: > > > > > > << I agree! > > > > > > Pascal wrote: > > > > > > >On 30-09-2002 17:32 Neal Friedenthal wrote: > > > > > > > >>I usually avoid jumping in on these "controversial" threads, but I > have > > to > > > do > > > >>so here. While I have no problems with the image itself, it is quite > > nice > > > and > > > >>very > > > >>tastefully done, everyone seems to have missed one important issue, > > > Clementine > > > >>is only 17 years old. At 17 she is below the age of concent. Her > parent > > or > > > >>guardian would have to give permission for the picture to be posted or > > for > > > >>that matter taken. The photographer has left himself open for possible > > civil > > > >>or even > > > >>criminal action should the girl or her parents object to the photo. To > > > >>photograph a minor, nude, without parental permission and supervision > > leaves > > > >>the > > > >>photographer open to a charge of statutory rape even if, as I'm sure > is > > the > > > >>case here, nothing more happened than the photo session. To take the > > photo > > > >>even > > > >>with parental concent would in my opinion be ill advised, to post it > > without > > > >>permission is downright stupid. Believe me I am no prude, but I am a > > > realist > > > >>you have > > > >>to cover your butt in this world. > > > >> > > > > > > > >I think that those who had a concern over this should have better > > contacted > > > >Gerry directly via private email instead of stirring up yet another > > debate > > > >in the LUG. > > > > > > > >Pascal > > > >NO ARCHIVE > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > I understand that the LUG has been irrationally contentious of late, but > I > > > certainly hope that in the spirit of civility the LUG doesn't become a > > hollow > > > shell of yes-men and a few women. > > > > > > I raised the issue of consent not as a form of bashing Gerry on the head > > but > > > simply expressing that in my mind it's a common courtesy to ask a nude > > > subject's consent before posting his or her photo on the web. Whilst I > > > could have emailed Gerry directly, why would I? Neither my point nor my > > post > > > was intended or contructed to embarass the man, rather it's an issue of > > > potential discussion. > > > > > > If simple discussion of issues on the LUG has automatically become > equated > > > with controversy I'm hard pressed to see which is worse, unending > > bickering > > > or the silent death that befalls a community of folks afraid to speak. > > > > > > > > > -kim > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > > > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html