Photographic laws

I know we're not supposed to create new threads because one has been closed, but I've just been composing the following which contains relevant and useful information and I'd appreciate it being allowed through. Thanks!

* * * * *

Originally Posted by Flubflow

To release the photo for public consumption, whether for commercial gain or not, you need permission from the subject in the form of a "release document".

IANAL, however AIUI this is not entirely correct.

If a photograph is to be used for commercial gain then it is a sensible idea to get a model release simply to avoid any possible legal problems over rights subsequent to publishing.

However it is not illegal to take a picture of a person in a public place, nor to print or publish that picture as a photograph or "pseudo-photograph" (ie jpg etc), provided you do not "defame" that person by applying inappropriate descriptions to the picture or distorting it etc.

It can be ruled illegal to take a picture of someone "where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy" (cf Naomi Campbell vs the Mirror), but that still seems to be the exception, rather than the rule.

The question you have to ask youself is this: When the subject agreed to have his/her photo taken by their girlfriend/boyfriend, could they have naturally expected that it would be posted up on the internet for all the world to see?

That is verging a moral question, not a legal one. Just posting a picture would not, AIUI, be illegal, but posting it with the description "She's a right slapper who goes like a rabbit" could well be considered defamatory.

Here are a couple of useful references:

http://www.epuk.org/resources/abcd/f...tproblems.html

http://www.sirimo.co.uk/ukpr.php/200...s_rights_guide

[Paul M]

Erm, what's AIUI & IANAL ?

Originally Posted by Paul M

Erm, what's AIUI & IANAL ?

As I Understand It

I Am Not A Lawyer

[handyman]

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...nG=Search&meta=

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=AIUI&meta=

[Flubflow]

Originally Posted by Graham

I know we're not supposed to create new threads because one has been closed, but I've just been composing the following which contains relevant and useful information and I'd appreciate it being allowed through. Thanks!

* * * * *



IANAL, however AIUI this is not entirely correct.

If a photograph is to be used for commercial gain then it is a sensible idea to get a model release simply to avoid any possible legal problems over rights subsequent to publishing.

However it is not illegal to take a picture of a person in a public place, nor to print or publish that picture as a photograph or "pseudo-photograph" (ie jpg etc), provided you do not "defame" that person by applying inappropriate descriptions to the picture or distorting it etc.

It can be ruled illegal to take a picture of someone "where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy" (cf Naomi Campbell vs the Mirror), but that still seems to be the exception, rather than the rule.



That is verging a moral question, not a legal one. Just posting a picture would not, AIUI, be illegal, but posting it with the description "She's a right slapper who goes like a rabbit" could well be considered defamatory.

Here are a couple of useful references:

http://www.epuk.org/resources/abcd/f...tproblems.html

http://www.sirimo.co.uk/ukpr.php/200...s_rights_guide

Thanks for that.

So, if you took a picture of someone in a public place then you could get away with it. However, if you took a portrait picture of an individual in a private residence/workplace and made them the subject of a post in a thread of an internet forum titled "ex-girlfriends" then they could legally screw you because they could expect a reasonable degree of privacy.

Originally Posted by Flubflow

So, if you took a picture of someone in a public place then you could get away with it.

Provided it wasn't "defamatory", most likely.

However, if you took a portrait picture of an individual in a private residence/workplace and made them the subject of a post in a thread of an internet forum titled "ex-girlfriends" then they could legally screw you because they could expect a reasonable degree of privacy.

That's a tricky one. AIUI the "expectation of privacy" bit hasn't really been tested apart from the Naomi Campbell case and, certainly, if it was that stringent, newsgroups like (I forget the title but it's something like "post your ex- nude!) would have generated a lot of high profile lawsuits.

Personally I think it's more of a moral choice, I would never post a photograph I had taken of someone without their permission if they could be identified from it and they were likely to be upset or embarassed by it.