posted
I checked with my legal department regarding this. Here is what they said.
If you are in a public place, then you can be photographed, video taped without any permission and the material can be used anyway the owner sees fit....These examples were used to clarify: street cameras and the Paparazzi photographing celebrities are 2 examples. Here is the catch, the photographer must be on public property to photograph you and not on private property such as a store front. A public sidewalk or public park is classified as a safe place to photograph anyone. If you wish to go in to a private establishment to photograph someone, then you need permission from the owner of the establishment but not the person you are photographing. If photography is not allowed, a sign will be posted. An example would be on a military base.
The law on this subject becomes society's reasonable expectation of privacy. example, You expect privacy in a Hotel Room or your own home, however, you should not expect privacy in a public park.
In having said the above, if you are in a Hotel room and you have your curtains open to the public and you can be seen from the sidewalk, then a photographer can snap a photo without permission because it is your responsibility to insure your privacy when you are protected in a private location such as a hotel room. Basically don't be stupid and leave the curtains open...
I hope this helps.
D xoxo
[ August 06, 2009, 08:40 PM: Message edited by: Danielle Moore ]
quote:Originally posted by Danielle Moore: if you are in a Hotel room and you have your curtains open to the public and you can be seen from the sidewalk, then a photographer can snap a photo without permission because it is your responsibility to insure your privacy when you are protected in a private location such as a hotel room.
I'm quite surprised at this actually... I thought taking pics of private property was illegal; especially if it invades privacy in such an intimate way...
posted
Gosh, this information is striking similar to that which I posted last week.
Is everything abundantly clear now, gang? Can we simply reply with the URL to this thread the next time someone asks about this subject?
Cheers, DL
quote:Originally posted by Danielle Moore: I checked with my legal department regarding this. Here is what they said.
If you are in a public place, then you can be photographed, video taped without any permission and the material can be used anyway the owner sees fit....These examples were used to clarify: street cameras and the Paparazzi photographing celebrities are 2 examples. Here is the catch, the photographer must be on public property to photograph you and not on private property such as a store front. A public sidewalk or public park is classified as a safe place to photograph anyone. If you wish to go in to a private establishment to photograph someone, then you need permission from the owner of the establishment but not the person you are photographing. If photography is not allowed, a sign will be posted. An example would be on a military base.
The law on this subject becomes society's reasonable expectation of privacy. example, You expect privacy in a Hotel Room or your own home, however, you should not expect privacy in a public park.
In having said the above, if you are in a Hotel room and you have your curtains open to the public and you can be seen from the sidewalk, then a photographer can snap a photo without permission because it is your responsibility to insure your privacy when you are protected in a private location such as a hotel room. Basically don't be stupid and leave the curtains open...
quote:Originally posted by dicklipschitz: Gosh, this information is striking similar to that which I posted last week.
Is everything abundantly clear now, gang? Can we simply reply with the URL to this thread the next time someone asks about this subject?
Cheers, DL
Right it's the same, and just as fricken wrong.
The OP asked what is allowed and not. He is in the UK. All these people quoting their take on US law, it has no relevance to the thread. The only proper advice is for him to seek a lawyer familiar with the laws and cases in his country/town.
Potential webmasters need to seek experts in their own area, don't ask for legal advice from anonymous people on a web forum. They have no credentials. They have no responsibility if their posts are wrong. I can just see someone being arrested and saying "well so-and-so on the what's-it forum said i could!"
What really gets me is the self appointed experts saying what is legal in the US. So does that mean it's legal in all the states? So it's federal law?
If you're gonna say whats legal, dont just declare it. Quote specific statutes. If you say the courts ruled for/against, quote specific cases. You are not helping by saying anything other than "seek local professionals in your area".
posted
Sigh ... there's nothing "wrong" about what was posted. The information is accurate.
As discussion turned toward U.S. law, that opened the floor for response. Personally, I was responding to them, having plenty of experience in the areas of privacy law. And I DID acknowledge that my comments don't apply to other countries.
Experts from other countries had the opportunity to share what they know. It's too bad they didn't do so.
As far as your junior high school debate club demand to cite specific statutes, look 'em up on your own time. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what state you're in, what city you're in ... this falls in the area of constitutional law, and the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld these principles time and time and time again. There are a few isolated exceptions, as stated.
You're right about one thing, though: Only a moron would depend on a forum for legal advice, regardless which country you're in. But knowledge is power, and the information presented here is a good basis for knowing the right questions to ask.
The frustration is that this topic has been addressed dozens of times previously and the advice is always going to be the same -- here are the guidelines, check with a lawyer for the specifics.
quote:Originally posted by dicklipschitz: Sigh ... there's nothing "wrong" about what was posted. The information is accurate.
As far as your junior high school debate club demand to cite specific statutes, look 'em up on your own time. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what state you're in, what city you're in ... this falls in the area of constitutional law, and the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld these principles time and time and time again. There are a few isolated exceptions, as stated.
The frustration is that this topic has been addressed dozens of times previously and the advice is always going to be the same -- here are the guidelines, check with a lawyer for the specifics.
Cheers, DL
So some anonymous dude on an anonymous forum says something is legal or not legal, and they don't back it up? People are supposed to believe them cause they said so? Cause they claim they are an expert? Bull fucking shit!
I am not going to believe, nor should anyone else, anybody regarding legal matters unless they have credentials. If I'm in a lawyers office, i wanna see his diploma. I wanna see other clients he has helped, i wannna know he can back up what he says. And every single lawyer I've ever consulted, will reference specific statutes from a book. Some anonymous guy on an anonymous forum stating he is an expert don't cut it.
And no, posting US law in a thread about UK law isn't helping, it's hijacking. Makes as much sense as someone asking how to change oil on his pinto, and someone posts how to change oil on his semi.
It's pretty obvious you wanna be known as "the forum expert" on this subject. Which is why you don't want anyone calling you out, or taking away your spotlight by answering.
People need to quit using forums as an answer to all their questions. seek experts in those areas in the real world.
posted
No one asked anyone to take their words as the gospel truth. I didn't. No one did.
You have every right -- and every responsibility -- to be skeptical about anything anyone says anywhere. Especially in the anonymous environment of a forum on the Internet. That's why I've always said about this topic, "I'm not a lawyer. Ask one."
You're missing the larger point -- this is simply an exchange of information. It's up to the receiver to judge its value.
I would no sooner rely on the words of an online poster for legal advice than for medical advice. Or advice for buying a car. But if someone says, "I felt radiating pain in my arm and it turned out I was having a heart attack," or "Don't buy Chrysler cars because their transmissions tend to blow up," I'd find that information useful.
I have no desire to be known as the forum expert on this topic, but if I can share some expertise with people, I'll gladly do it, because I do know what the law says. Whether you choose to use it as a starting point for further inquiry or exploration is up to you. I have no intention of taking what's essentially a pleasant diversion, and turning it into an "Ask the Expert" thread. You're the one who's up in arms about it, my friend.
There was no "hijacking" of a thread. The discussion turned; some of us replied. Relax.
Fortunately, you've added a kernel of value to your post: "People need to quit using forums as an answer to all their questions. seek experts in those areas in the real world."
Let me say, "amen."
And let me add this: "Folks, please search the forum history before resurrecting old topics so we don't have to tread old ground."
posted
Heyy, the story is not nice: Pervert having fetish taking foot pictures...
No no no!!! It's not pervert, but it's also not right to take under age girls pictures. Models are for this work and also every girl who accepts this and you have to place some words on paper (becoming a model) to do this. FOOT FETISH IS NOT PERVERT!!! It's nature!
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
