Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/06/12

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Asking permission, KISS & the decisive moment
From: "charlie" <charlie@highhill.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 13:43:36 -0400
References: <LNBBLBNFHNEHGFKFMALGEENCBJAB.tim@KairosPhoto.com>

I'm curious, when people refer to "publishing", does that include for
example posting a picture on the web in say a PAW?

charlie
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Atherton" <tim@KairosPhoto.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 1:01 PM
Subject: RE: [Leica] Asking permission, KISS & the decisive moment


> > I've heard that there's law like this in Quebec and in France. I just
> > came from shooting the Canada Grand Prix, and I did lots of people shots
> > with neither permission nor hassle, though I'll admit I wasn't so bold
> > as I am on the streets of New York. I'm not particularly unruly, but in
> > New York I know for a fact that my work is considered protected speech
> > under the First Amendment. Elsewhere I display my friendly side a little
> > more openly and no one seems to care.
> >
> > Gilbert
>
>
> Hi Gilbert - the Quebec Constitution has a Right to Privacy in it (unlike
> the rest of Canada), which means that in practice it is balanced against
the
> other rights of the Press and Expression.
>
> There was one major case. A Street Photographer had taken pictures of an
> neighbourhood in Quebec, which included pictures of a young woman (sitting
> on some steps I think). These photographs were later used in a publication
> illustrating a story about that neighbourhood. The woman objected and the
> case eventually went to the Supreme Court of Canada.  They found in favour
> of the woman (this being Canada, damages were minimal...) thought there
were
> a couple of strong dissenting opinions. The Supreme Court also set out
> guidelines for use of images in publications. An obviously identifiable
> person must give there permission if the image is published, unless (my
> words here, I don't have the decision at hand anymore) the person is
> guidelines associated with a news story - biker boss leaves courthouse,
> politician announces resignation etc. Or a crowd/general scene where the
> person is only a minor part of the picture. BUT, a photo of a girl
> struggling with her umbrella in the wind to illustrate a generic story on
> unseasonally high winds and rain (a newspaper staple!) could not be used
> without her permission - getting the drift here?
>
> SO - there is nothing to say you can't take the photographs. You just
can't
> publish them without the persons permission unless they are "newsworthy".
I
> think this would also include exhibiting them in an exhibition - so, as in
> France, it could dampen "street photography (there was a news story from
> France recently about a well known photographer who photographed in his
> native France for many years - don't recall who right now - whose major
> exhibition had to be cancelled because many of the shots were taken
without
> permission.
>
> Now, most people probably don't even know or care. And even then, most
would
> bother to sue - and damages are unlikely to be high unless you totally
> misrepresent the person. Sooo - maybe it's a cost of doing business!
>
> tim
>
>
> --
> 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

In reply to: Message from "Tim Atherton" <tim@KairosPhoto.com> (RE: [Leica] Asking permission, KISS & the decisive moment)