Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/07/01

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: Documentary Photography 2003
From: "firkin" <firkin@balhpl01.ncable.net.au>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 16:53:39 +1000
References: <LNBBLBNFHNEHGFKFMALGOEEFGGAB.tim@KairosPhoto.com>

So its publishing the image which becomes the "crime" not taking the image 
in the first place? Is there any reference to the use of the image,ie for 
financial gain versus a competition etc 

Cheers 


Tim Atherton writes: 

> Darn, it took off before the spell checker finished!... 
> 
> briefly, the Quebec Charter has a right to privacy (it's note worded exactly
> like that?) which is weighed against the right's of the press and the
> freedom of expression found in the same Charter. The rest of Canada doesn't
> have a right to privacy. This stems from the Napoleonic aspect of Quebec
> law. 
> 
> A case went to the Supreme Court of Canada about generic type street photos
> of a person illustrating a magazine story about life in a (somewhat run
> down?) Montreal suburb. The Supreme Court found the person photographed did
> have a right to privacy in a public place which overrode the other two
> rights mentioned above in this case. The Supreme Court set out guidelines
> for press/media use of photographs where a person was identifiable, without
> their explicit permission. These are fairly limited (i.e. - identifiable
> person struggling with their umbrella to illustrate a story on April showers
> isn't allowed - unless you have a release. Biker boss on trial leaving court
> is. Street photography isn't dead i Quebec - you can still take the pictures
> without permission - publishing them in any form without permission is
> difficult. I believe the same (possibly stricter) is true in France. Emanuel
> probably knows all of this better than I do. 
> 
> I can dig out the case + info for anyone who is interested. 
> 
> tim 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of frank
>> theriault
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 7:41 PM
>> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Documentary Photography 2003 
>>
>>
>> I don't know much about Quebec's Civil Law system (the rest of North
>> America is based on the English Common Law system), but I know that France
>> has some very restrictive laws about the taking and use of images without
>> permission of the subjects.  As Quebec's Civil Law is based on
>> French Civil
>> Law, your question makes a great deal of sense. 
>>
>> -frank 
>>
>> Vick Ko wrote: 
>>
>> > Is this because it is Quebec?
>> >
>> > I've taken photos of my son at "Play and Swim" at the Y in Ottawa.
>> >
>> > I was using a Nikon RF with 50f1.1 (sorry, the Leica was at home).  The
>> > bokeh was stunning.
>> >
>> > regards,
>> > Vick
>> >
>> > Greg J. Lorenzo wrote:
>> >
>> > > Emanuel lives in Montreal Quebec which has some unique laws regarding
>> > > photography not found elsewhere in North America.
>> > >
>> > > I suspect the local Y is sensitive to this and thereby restrict or
>> > > prohibit photography inside their premises.
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > >
>> > > Greg
>> >
>> > --
>> > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html 
>>
>> --
>> "What a senseless waste of human life"
>> -The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch 
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
 


Alastair Firkin @ work ;-) 

http://www.afirkin.com
http://www.familyofman2.com 

- --
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] Documentary Photography 2003)