TP: Photography not allowed? |
Page 123 5> |
Author | |
catlady ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 05 March 2006 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Posts: 306 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted: 12 November 2007 at 23:16 |
I took some photos of an event. I put them up on Smugmug. They're not for sale, it's just the hosting site I use. I thought the people who took part in the event might be interested in seeing them so I e-mailed the organisers.
What came back was a demand that I remove the photos as I didn't have their permission (" a licence") and they claimed I was infringing their copyright, and that of the Forestry Commission whose land the event took place on. I explained again that I was not selling. They then said no problem but I should get their "media accreditation"...they didn't say but I'm guessing there would be a cost to that. Just another example of the ongoing nastiness towards our hobby in the UK? If landowners have copyright over all images including their land, what hope for landscape photographers? If we can't take pictures of events and share them without a "licence", how long before public photography is banned? I don't think I'm paranoid; we've had a lot of publicity here this year about people being warned off over street photography, and threatened for photographing children (there was one where a gentleman was taking pictures of his own son playing football and one of the other children's mothers wanted to call in the police!) What do you think? [Topic moved into Knowledge Base -- brettania] Edited by brettania - 13 November 2007 at 22:06 |
|
focussed on infinity.....pity about the near vision
|
|
![]() |
|
RosieA100 ![]() Emeritus group ![]() Moderator emeritus Joined: 27 October 2006 Country: Australia Location: Melbourne Status: Offline Posts: 4824 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
How rediculous!!!!
![]() ![]() We have a petition here in Australia (http://www.petitiononline.com/ausphoto/) so that we can try and make the polititions understand that most of us are just taking pictures for our benefit and usually the professionals among us are up front with organisors of events and have proper accreditation, it's those sneaky "up skirters" and the like that are giving us a bad name. We are trying to stop the legislators from making it law that there be camera free zones. Currently there are 4542 signatures ~ any Aussies out there please add your name! Our camera club was out a few weeks ago taking night shots of a local shopping centre area. A stupid guard came out and told us we were not allowed to photograph there... our President told him where to go ~ very nicely ![]() ![]() ![]() Wow, that was long... sorry ![]() ![]() |
|
a700,a100
16-80Z, 50/1.7, 70-210/4, 75-300G SSM, 100-400APO, 15-30, 28-300, 90 macro, 19-35, 100/3.5, Lensbaby Composer |
|
![]() |
|
cjc181166 ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 19 June 2006 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Posts: 1900 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Is this from that Rally you took photos at? I read their Press application and it seems rather amatuerish. Considering it is run by a magazine.
It just seems that everyone is high sensitive to trying to protect copyright, even when there are none. |
|
![]() |
|
badlydrawnroy ![]() Senior Member ![]() Emeritus Member Joined: 08 December 2006 Country: United Kingdom Location: North Yorkshire Status: Offline Posts: 5201 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Your not paranoid catlady, they are out to get you !
You try to do someone a good turn and it 'bites you' Makes you wish for the 'good old days' eh when people were assumed innocent until proven otherwise. I was at a Go Kart track recently with someone karting. I had my camera and was practising panning on the fast moving carts. The owner came and stopped me because there were children driving the carts. I pointed out they had wacking great face helmets on and they could have been smurfs ! Determined not to go quietly, I announced myself to the 'massed' parents told them what I was doing and collected e-mail addresses for anyone who wanted a photo sending. Roy |
|
![]() |
|
catlady ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 05 March 2006 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Posts: 306 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Rosie...thanks. Glad your group got a good guy at the second site.
Craig, yes that's the one. I won't go near any of their events again (and therefore not pay their car parking fee). Roy...good for you! |
|
focussed on infinity.....pity about the near vision
|
|
![]() |
|
brettania ![]() Admin Group ![]() Dyxum factotum Joined: 17 July 2005 Country: New Zealand Location: Auckland Status: Offline Posts: 20650 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Why not go back to them and ask for media accreditation (stating that the pics are still not for commercial use) and since one spin-off is that you are helping publicise an official event, something which they surely would welcome -- that if any charges are involved they should waive them. If you are not making money, why should they make money out of you. Also if there were other people taking snaps, ask what has happened to their pics. Be very nice and see what they say. If they insist on a charge, take down the pics from Smugmug, and start writing to newpapers and ringing talk shows. Also write to the MP covering the Forestry Commission and the local MP for the area. |
|
![]() |
|
Wētāpunga ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 02 September 2007 Country: New Zealand Location: New Zealand Status: Offline Posts: 6185 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Well, I think at one level we have to acknowledge that changes in technology, has led to an entirely new impact on people's right to privacy. Digital technology has made cameras more accessible- many cellphones have one- and the internet has made distribution easier. That has meant previous standards of privacy have simply collapsed, and this is exacerbated by umm, scum, who take and distribute humiliating or perverted pictures of people.
I take photos of disabled children at for Riding for the Disabled. I need- and obtain- consents to do so. It gives parents and the children the privacy they need. I'm completely okay with this. It does though sound as if the pendulum has swung a little too far in the UK. Appropriate uses of cameras- to say take candid photos of a child's football match- doesn't seem to be something worthy of legal conflict. |
|
a7riii, a9- Voigtländer 15/4.5, 110/2.5 M; Zeiss Loxia- 21/2.8, 35/2, 50/2 & 85/2.4, Zeiss Batis- 85/1.8 & 135/2.8; Sony 24-105/4 G; Sigma 70/2.8 M; Tamron 150-500 f5-6.7; Sony SAL 135/2.8 STF
|
|
![]() |
|
924nut ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 29 October 2005 Country: United Kingdom Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Posts: 252 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Roy - I totally agree with you it is madness but dont blame the circuit owners or officials they are only applying the Law in its current form - they can be closed down if people taking photographs of children do not sign on. I am resident photographer at Wombwell kart track in yorkshire - but as long as you sign in there is not a problem - this is a completely different issue to the one that started the post - selling or showing photographs of motor race meetings in the UK has become very prohibitive and personally i just dont bother now - and yes the media accreditation is hard to come by or you have to pay a large fee for the right to sell display images!!!! |
|
2006 3rd Place in Motorsport News Photograph of the Year & a Runner up in the 2005 Competion - Both on Minolta 7D
|
|
![]() |
|
analytical ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 30 January 2007 Country: United States Location: Texas Status: Offline Posts: 3069 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
A difficult issue. In the US you may be photographed in a public place without your permission. Local ordinances have nibbled the edges, usual in the interest of protecting children, but the broad issue is constitutional. But that's legality and deals with only one of three issues: creating the image.
However to publish (in any form) the image generally does require permission, assuming the individual can be recognized, certainly for any commercial purpose, but even for non-profit. The individual is considered to own the copyright on his or her own likeness. Specific UK law will likely be different of course. The third issue is manners and/or ethics. Many people would object to having their image published, especially if they did not anticipate that they would be photographed. I think most people would agree that getting permisssion is the right approach, even if when not legally required. |
|
![]() |
|
cezarL ![]() Senior Member ![]() Emeritus Member Joined: 16 January 2007 Country: Romania Location: Romania Status: Offline Posts: 2796 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
So....what? If you go out on a weekend to do some street photography, you have to run after each shot, and ask the people if they're happy with you showing us the pics?
(let's not forget that street shooting is often not about the individual, but about the whole setting and circumstance depicted) |
|
“Stare, pry, listen, eavesdrop. Die knowing something. You are not here long.” - Walker Evans
http://cezarl.zenfolio.com |
|
![]() |
|
Cekari ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 15 August 2005 Country: Sweden Location: Sweden Status: Offline Posts: 7525 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
This is starting to get realy redicules...
Oh, you took a pic of that bird, it has a nest at my land. Give me money... Sorry, but WTF... Why not tell them you are making a free ad for them and now... how about they pay you for that? Silly dworks... Sorry again, but I get so mad about things like this... I do understand about children and private etc, but a public event... when will they demand we go to those blindfolded? Aaarggh!!! |
|
Images https://www.flickr.com/photos/cekari/sets/ ,
English is a funny language, seldom it spells the words like I do |
|
![]() |
|
Shercando ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 30 September 2005 Country: United States Location: Madison, WI Status: Offline Posts: 1966 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I am in the USA and had a bad experience at a large shopping mall here. I wanted to capture candid shots of happy faced Holiday shoppers just before Christmas two years ago. I set myself up against a wall next to a column between two shops. I got off two shots when a burly security guard set upon me ordering me to stop immediately as no photography is allowed in the mall. He ejected me from the premises, hands on, while lecturing me on the way to the nearest exit that no mall in Madison Wisconsin permits photography.
It's not been tested legally here that I know of but there is an argument that mall shop owners object and their agencies do not allow their places to be photographed except by those hired. For me, it was a terrible insult to be physically ejected exactly like a drunk tossed out of a saloon. He said if I came back in that he would have me arrested by city police. This was hammered out in ad nauseam another forum with final results that the malls have the right to exclude anyone they wish. Once ordered off, a re-entry is trespassing and a criminal offense that can be enforced by city police. |
|
Shercando
|
|
![]() |
|
eddyizm ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 26 January 2007 Country: United States Location: California Status: Offline Posts: 2323 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
next thing you know we'll be labeled terrorists and there will be a new "war on photographers"
i wish i was more joking than not. :-| |
|
![]() |
|
Hoffy ![]() Senior Member ![]() Joined: 30 December 2006 Country: Australia Location: Australia Status: Offline Posts: 2054 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
It does seem rather extreme. I am into Motorsport photography as well & I emailed a promoter once with similar questions. They basically said that as long as the pictures were not used for commercial reasons at all (that includes sale as well as using them for any other promotion or campaing) that it was OK to post them.
BUT, on my forum, we decided to create a year book of motorsport images, which would be for sale (I.E., to cover the cost of the book only, no profit). This time we went to the governing body of the particular category & they said no way or pay royalties. So, the book is now out of the question. I to a degree, do accept that organisations & bodies do need to protect their image & their assests. They are in it to make money, so basically profiting from what they have established is out. But where do you draw the line? The Australian Football League this year advised that only photographers from their agency could cover games (at a professional level). Cricket Australia have done something similar. Events such as the Australian Grand prix have mandated that lenses less the 200mm be used in public areas. To be honest, I dont think it will be long until all non accredited photography is banned from such events. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Page 123 5> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer
In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania
Feel free to contact us if needed.