Re: [Leica] Re- Clementine

[Henning Wulff <henningw@archiphoto.com>]

At 8:18 PM -0500 9/30/02, Don R. wrote:
>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
>

Don, I thought Kim's remarks were well thought out and appropriate. 
They expressed a concern I had as well, and only pointed out an issue 
which obviously occurred to many of use. 'Control freak' is really 
not an appropriate description.

>  >
>>  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


- -- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html