do you think it's fair for people to take pictures of you and put them on a website without your permission?

Nevermind fair.... is it even legal?

yes I flippin do mind and am very annoyed by it. Shall be having strong words if I see anyone who has done it to me. It is an invasion of MY privacy and I do not want my pic on the net unless I decide. OK???

good point t020, i think it stinks :gag:

no camera's at meets in future and no snaps without permission, you understand me? :loopy:

don't bother me... or my friends! If your having a good time why not share it... share the moment and all :thumbsup:

If I pose for a photo in a club or whatever and its posted, fine.

However, if a photo is taken without my knowledge and is then posted onto a site without my knowledge then I do not think that is fine.

If its taken without my knowledge but then my permission asked later then I dont find anything wrong with that and I wouldnt decline permission - unless I was naked and the angle was wrong!

So not known, and without permission, legal?

It's also become a bigger problem since the advent of camera phones. Usually one would rarely have a camera about their person, but almost everybody has a mobile handy. I heard somewhere that people were calling for schools to ban camera phones as they were being used prominently in bullying campaigns.

has sum1 been takin pics?

legally I think it depends on whether you are somewhere where you would have "a reasonable expectation of privacy".

Morally it's ambigous. You might be caught in the background of a photo I took, i'm not going to hide that photo away in case you are offended. However, i'd be annoyed if there was a photo of 'me' rather than a photo where i happened to be caught in frame, that was taken without my knowledge.

oops i voted no, but after reading the thread i get the feeling its about one of your nites out, thought u meant in general

Originally posted by MTheo
has sum1 been takin pics?

Take a look at this thread http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31689&perpage=&pagenumber=4

Should fill you in a bit :)

ohhh....ok doky...

well it wasent me :) i wasent there this time wahey in the clear!


but i dont even let my mum take pics of me ;) cant afford to keep replacing the lenses ;)

The legalities are a little 'grey'.

In the film industry, anyone who's filmed signs a 'release' that basically says that their image can be used by the film makers in any way that the film makers see fit.

In France it is illegal to take a photograph of someone and use that image without their permisison (I think). 'Usage' being publication or display.

In terms of whether it's polite or not - IMHO it's bad form. Some countries have introduced a requirement that camera phones make a distinct noise when in use as a camera, and I think this is an excellent idea.

I'd certainly be unhappy if people were taking pics of individuals in meets without their permission and then posting those pics on a website. Whilst we might not expect to have privacy sat in a pub bar, it's also reasonable to expect that our mug shots don't get splattered over the Internet.

Joe

what about when people are in clubs....there are like 50 pictures every week of clubbers on the websites...i doubt they signed a release....and im sure some looked a lot worse for wear!

Originally posted by MTheo
what about when people are in clubs....there are like 50 pictures every week of clubbers on the websites...i doubt they signed a release....and im sure some looked a lot worse for wear!

But you are aware that the club takes photo's and posts them. Often the ppl on there "thrive" at being put on. Big difference.

not really big difference....what if you go to club and dont know this? its not like its on a sign at the door. its still being taken without everybodies knowledge.

i dont mean the pics where people are blatently posing for the camera...i mean the ones that are unaware.

So does that still make it right?

There's also the possibility that the context that someone finds themselves in in a picture could be viewed as defamatory.

For example - a picture that shows someone apparently drinking alcohol when they have a strong belief in not drinking. In reality, the person was holding the glass for someone whilst they went to the loo, but in the split second of the image being captured all you see is someone with a glass of beer in their hands.

Joe

im not sayin its right? im saying its wrong!

It's perfectly legal in most circumstances, whether it's fair is a lot more open to question and depends even more on the circumstances and the use the picture is being put to.

I for one post a lot of photographs to my website. Some of those feature people, some who I know, some who I don't. I'd hate to have to get a release from everybody included on there, partly because of the amount of hassle involved but mostly because it really isn't practical to stop every stranger who wanders through the background of a shot and ask them to sign a piece of paper waiving the rights to their image in perpituity.

Also, a lot of my favourite photos from famous photographers are "candid camera" type ones where the photographer has just been out on the streets taking pictures of people unawares.

On a few occasions, people have asked me to remove pictures of them from my website, or have specified when I'm taking the pictures that they don't want them made public, and I'm fine with that.

It's a very tricky question but on balance, given that anyone who steps outside their front door is already in a situation where they can be seen by the public, I think the onus is on the person photographed to make their wishes clear.

Now, what I don't agree with is people who will steal a photo of your girlfriend from your website, play with it in photoshop, and then submit it to mingers.com (yes, I've had it happen).

I don't mind pix being taken of nights out but when you're in a group, would have thought it'd be easy enough to say that you're going to be taking pix and let people pose or not pose as they wish.

I suppose it could lead to problems if pix are published on an open website. Sometimes people have issues with other people or maybe they may be somewhere they aren't suposed to be ... IMO, better to be upfront about it from the start

completely agree with ruby,

couldn't have put it better myself.

Originally posted by rubydazzler
I don't mind pix being taken of nights out but when you're in a group, would have thought it'd be easy enough to say that you're going to be taking pix and let people pose or not pose as they wish.

I suppose it could lead to problems if pix are published on an open website. Sometimes people have issues with other people or maybe they may be somewhere they aren't suposed to be ... IMO, better to be upfront about it from the start

Yes agree, it's easy enough to ask, it's polite aswell. We have had pictures taken at the CRB meets and people were asked if they would be ok with them going on the 'net, no harm done at all.

I've contributed quite a few photo's of old friends to a web site, in all of the shots the person knew the pic was being taken. Although over the years I've lost touch with a lot of the people I was incredibly careful not to submit anything which could prove embarrassing or offensive [the hair styles and clothing apart] The responses when people have come across the site have been high amusement and comments like 'gee didn't we look young'!!!
I think people who either manipulate pics or show people in a bad light should be kicked hard.
http://www.borracho.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/rock/index.shtml
Just in casae anyone is interested

Originally posted by t020
Nevermind fair.... is it even legal?
I have some vague recollection of a TV programme about the 'paparazzi' - possibly not illegal in this country, but almost certainly so in France, where the privacy laws are much tighter.
As I remember it......
:)

i'm quite camera shy anyhow, so i prefer not to have my photo taken, if i can, but i think its polite to ask beforehand if its ok to post them.:)

Originally posted by jonluvsnique
i'm quite camera shy anyhow, so i prefer not to have my photo taken, if i can, but i think its polite to ask beforehand if its ok to post them.:)


yes very true to ask for permission before hand.... The FBI might be after them or something :suspect: :hihi:

I take pics around Sheffield and other areas, it simply isn't feasible to chase every possible background person and ask their permission as DanSumption says.

If anyone contacts me and asks for the removal of a photo because they are in it, i'm happy to do so. CCTV has us all on tape anyway, so i'm not too fussed myself.

Think of tourist hotspots, how would you enforce such rules there??

I hate having my photo taken, I really REALLY hate it... I think the point in hand here is that some of us turned up to have a few social bevvies, most of us don't even use our real names, after all, we dont want everyone to know who we are, where we work, how many kids we have and what the security is like on our houses :P

but then someone sneakily took pictures of the entire group without asking anyone and put them all on a web-site for the world to see! thankfully I don't look a complete and utter dick on them, but I'm still not totally impressed that someone took a picture of me...

if she'd had one of when me and Ruby were fighting I wouldn't have minded, cus it would have had me laughing for weeks :hihi:

if someone has a camera with a wide enough lenseto get me in, then best of luck to 'em.

back in 2000 I went to Glastonbury festival and a couple of months later I went into a newsagent, there on the front page of the Independent was myself advertising a photography competition - they'd used a photo of me taking a photo at glastonbury without my knowledge, I didn't even know the photo had been taken - is that allowed?

Originally posted by HarrietStar
back in 2000 I went to Glastonbury festival and a couple of months later I went into a newsagent, there on the front page of the Independent was myself advertising a photography competition - they'd used a photo of me taking a photo at glastonbury without my knowledge, I didn't even know the photo had been taken - is that allowed?

Yes, it is.

As I mentioned on another thread, a friend once told me I was on the cover of his sociology text book, protesting at a demo in the 1980s (although I never saw the book).

Nobody in this country owns the right to their image; if they did, you'd see a lot fewer photographs of celebrities in the newspapers.

I've just put no on the poll - as in no, I don't think it's fair that photo's are taken and put on the web without permission. As per the first post.
Now I've just seen the thread title and my answer to that is yes! Yes, I do mind my photo taken and put on the web without my permission... :confused:

Very confusing... :suspect:

Is anyone else confused or is it just me as per usual? :D

And I wonder if this means the poll may not acurrately reflect the opinions... :heyhey:

I'm not bothered as long as I'm clothed.

Originally posted by DanSumption
[B]I for one post a lot of photographs to my website. Some of those feature people, some who I know, some who I don't. I'd hate to have to get a release from everybody included on there, partly because of the amount of hassle involved but mostly because it really isn't practical to stop every stranger who wanders through the background of a shot and ask them to sign a piece of paper waiving the rights to their image in perpituity.

Also, a lot of my favourite photos from famous photographers are "candid camera" type ones where the photographer has just been out on the streets taking pictures of people unawares.
/B]


It's a tricky one, but I think it comes down to the circumstance in which the photo was taken, and the subject matter.

If you are in public then you are in public. If someone takes a picture and you are on it, then that's simply a side effect. Certainly I'm sure that the Star don't ask permission from everyone on the picture when taking various shots in the town centre or at public events.

The difference is that if it is a picture of a particular person or group, ask their permission first. If it's just a picture of an event or place that happens to have people in it, then that's just what it is. If someone features prominently, ask that person's permission.

In the context of forum meets, if you have a camera with you, then say at the start of the night "I've brought a camera along, mind if I take a few snaps for the web?". I bet most people won't mind, and if someone does then just don't put the ones featuring that person on the web (assuming that they stray into some shots accidentally).

thanks for clearing it up, it was just a shock to see myself on the front page, haha

I don't see the problem really. You step outside your house and the public can see you. What is the difference between that and having your image on a public network? If you don't want to be in a situation where the public might see you, you may as well walk around with a paper bag over your head!

The only time there might be a problem is when you are in your own territory or in a private situation with someone else, and a third party takes a photograph without your knowledge or consent. Then it would not be right for that image to be made public.

I guess people don't like being reminded of what they look like.

If I'm taking photos of mates then I'll tend not to announce it, because I think people generally look quite artificial when they pose for pictures. I wouldn't put 'em on the internet unless people say it's ok first, and get quite upset if I see myself on t'net.

Pictures of people should never be used for anything without permision.:(

The only time I got really really upset about people taking photographs of me was in a pub in Lincoln. I was sitting at a table with my friend having a drink, when we noticed some guys behaving a bit oddly on the table opposite. I looked closer to realise that they were holding a mobile phone under the table, taking pictures of up my rather short skirt.

I know that in the US this has become a specific offence - 'upskirting' but I don't think its really as common over here. I really wish I'd done something at the time other than drink up and leave as quickly as possible. Safe to say i never wear skirts anymore.

A few things come to mind. Didn't the 14 year old that appeared in nuts (ahem) have to sign release forms. I know there are rules on taking photos/videos of children. Wasnt there that whole scare story about peadophiles using camera phones in gyms aswell.


Randomly, think it is illeagl to take someone's picutre in public in France. Reason i know this is becasue the times newspaper took photos of my mum and uncle and put them in a sunday times special investigation but that was decades ago...

pictures put up on the web without permission would be offensive to me,
I hate having my pic took anyway, hence my lovely little avatar, rather appropiate for me.:blush:

Originally posted by Bikertec
Pictures of people should never be used for anything without permision.:(

I have photo's of jiu jitsu events where hundreds of people are in shot. There's no way i'm going to hunt them all down (even if i could) and ask if they mind that i put these on my server. The ones in the foreground tend to be the people I was trying to photograph, although random bystanders watching the action may well get caught in shot.

If anyone is on this picture and wants to be removed Tough! (http://www.PhotoShare.co.nz/PhotoShareGallery1/100193/101608/MAirportMay2820031507679_L.jpg)
Public events are public.
Private events, tell people you have a camera if anyone objects don't do it.
Twiglet you should have called the police.

i agree public events are public.

there could be an issue about a picture implying something that isnt true but its more the media that try to achieve this!

what i dont think anyone has mentioned, its those people who dont want to be seen that worry.

secret day out at event miles from home with a secret girlfriend then you appear on a website! (not personal experience!)

Originally posted by Bikertec
Pictures of people should never be used for anything without permision.:(

And how would you work that in reality?

What about reporters showing a film of 100,000 on a protest march?

What about highlighting the problem of binge drinking by showing pictures of drunks making a*ses of themselves on the streets?

Images of police beating a suspect?

Before taking a picture of Nelson's Column for a magazine would we need to clear Trafalgar Square first?


Should there be a law that permission must be granted before a picture can be published? No.

Should there be laws to stop people taking "up-skirt" pictures and the like with their mobile phone camera? Yes.

Touching on the subject of camera phones. At my daughters school someone held a camera under the door of the toilet and took a photo! I think camera phones are a worry with all the pervs around.

I voted no - I don't like my photo being taken full stop, let alone published for all the world to see.

Yup, camera phones can be used in worryingly sneaky ways. And just wait until we get spectacle-cameras in a few years' time!

Something that annoys me a lot is that, because I have a fairly large camera, I am very conspicuous when taking photos. Several times I have been in art galleries, at concerts etc, and have been asked to stop taking photographs. Meanwhile, all around me have been people snapping pictures on camera phones who are allowed to quite happily get on with it, either the staff on duty are blind to them or they don't consider them to be "proper" cameras and hence not worth bothering about, even though top-end camera phones are almost at the same resolution as my camera.

At Christmas parents were ask to sign a disclaimer form if they wanted to video their kids doing the nativity play stating that they were not going to put the images on the net!

What is the world coming to?

spectacle cameras. Interesting idea, but surely these are less intrusive than a camera phone. Afterall I'd assume that's difficult to get your head into a position where you could conceivably see up someones skirt or down their blouse, at least without looking rather suspicous, whereas a phone can be held in your hand at any height any angle without looking too odd.

Originally posted by Cyclone
spectacle cameras. Interesting idea, but surely these are less intrusive than a camera phone.
Yes, inasmuch as it'd be harder to take "upskirt" shots. But no in that it'd be a lot harder to police than even camera phones, and a lot easier for the user to take photos without the subject suspecting anything.

Actually, it seems that things have progressed a great deal in this field (http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=glasses+camera) since I first heard about it, a couple of years ago.

I noticed a kid with a camera phone in the changing rooms happily snapping away at my boy's martial arts class, while the kids were getting changed.

:loopy: :suspect: :rant:

Needless to say the instructors were informed (and the police)

Originally posted by Don_Kiddick
I noticed a kid with a camera phone in the changing rooms happily snapping away at my boy's martial arts class, while the kids were getting changed.

:loopy: :suspect: :rant:

Needless to say the instructors were informed (and the police)

you informed the police about a child taking photo's, albeit in the changing rooms... Maybe he can be charged with paedophilia.

Originally posted by dawny1
At Christmas parents were ask to sign a disclaimer form if they wanted to video their kids doing the nativity play stating that they were not going to put the images on the net!

What is the world coming to?

This is a common thing to happen.
My other half works at a comprehensive school, so i get to see all the plays and shows the school does.

Before every performance, the assistant head always announces that "No photographs or filming of your children is allowed.

Originally posted by Cyclone
you informed the police about a child taking photo's, albeit in the changing rooms... Maybe he can be charged with paedophilia.
I did not know his further intentions. What with WAP technology an all - would you risk pictures of your partially clothed child apperaing on some chav internet site - even for a laff?

or maybe you think it is just a laff?

Originally posted by 21steve
what i dont think anyone has mentioned, its those people who dont want to be seen that worry.

secret day out at event miles from home with a secret girlfriend then you appear on a website! (not personal experience!)
If they don't want to be seen doing something they should not be doing, then they shouldn't be doing it in the first place.

Originally posted by Don_Kiddick
I did not know his further intentions. What with WAP technology an all - would you risk pictures of your partially clothed child apperaing on some chav internet site - even for a laff?

or maybe you think it is just a laff?

no, i just think you probably overreacted. what did the police do when you reported this?

I was filming on my camcorder in Amsterdam when something funny happened (don't ask, it's not that funny at all when I come to think of it, quite dreary actually). I sent it into "You've Been Framed", who sent me a load of forms out asking if I knew the person in the clip (I didn't) and making me sign away any future royalties. 2 years and £250 later, it was on the telly.

So filming people without their knowledge was definetely allowed then....