Street Photography

[Lrftie]

I took a photo of someone without their knowledge, and put it on a forum website etc. and they recognised themselves, or someone else recognised that person and told them, could I be liable and possibly sued, even though I am not making monies from the shot?

 

[tezmed]

was the photo zoomed in on them or did it just coincidentally contain the person??

i very much doubt theres anything that could be done to be honest, but if he wants it removed then out of courtesy i'd remove it....

 

[wontolla]

As above I would think, not a lot they can do legally, but there may be extenuating circumstances.

 

[Lrftie]

was the photo zoomed in on them or did it just coincidentally contain the person??

i very much doubt theres anything that could be done to be honest, but if he wants it removed then out of courtesy i'd remove it....

The photo contained 5 different people, there was a party of three walking towards me plus two other persons in the background. Thank you for your answer.

 

[Lrftie]

was the photo zoomed in on them or did it just coincidentally contain the person??

i very much doubt theres anything that could be done to be honest, but if he wants it removed then out of courtesy i'd remove it....

Thank you for your reply. some times laws and privacy deters us from publishing photos of third parties.

 

[tezmed]

they'd only be annoyed if caught out with a bit on the side or something- trying to save his own bacon.... maybe his misses might see lol but thats his prob not yours lol.... then you could twist things a little and say you want money to remove it lol

 

[tezmed]

i vaguely know about copyright regs, but cant see how a person could contravene any legislation as 'you was just taking a general picture of the scene at hand'

 

[Marc]

Lrftie, I've moved this and your other thread to Talk Photography as Forum Discussion is for the discussion of issues regarding the forum itself.

Thanks and welcome to TP

 

[Mike_T]

As I understand it, provided the photograph was taken in/from a public place then the persons in the photographs have no legal recourse.

 

[leftcurl]

bit like the thousands and thousands of people photographed on google maps

 

[MartynK]

Providing the photography doesn't portray the subject in a derogatory or defamatory context, yes. That could be actionable.

 

[POAH]

Providing the photography doesn't portray the subject in a derogatory or defamatory context, yes. That could be actionable.

That's not quite correct. If you use a photo and headline it or manipulate the photo to make it portray someone in a derogatory or defamatory context then you can be sued. You cannot sue someone e based on what you are doing in a photo.

 

[MartynK]

That's not quite correct. If you use a photo and headline it or manipulate the photo to make it portray someone in a derogatory or defamatory context then you can be sued. You cannot sue someone e based on what you are doing in a photo.

OK. Let me rephrase my post. Just add the word 'wrongfully' before derogatory or defamatory.

 

[KIPAX]

very much doubt theres anything that could be done to be honest, but if he wants it removed then out of courtesy i'd remove it....

simple as that really

 

[Southdowns]

Yep, you're in a public place, and can take photo's of anything or anyone you can see from there, zoomed in or not. You can be had for harassment or similar depending on how you pursue or obstruct someone to get the photo, but it's not the actual shot that'd be the issue, it'd be your behaviour in getting it.

Courtesy demands that you treat them reasonably and remove it if they genuinely object and it doesn't inconvenience you too much, but the law doesn't, and whether or not you make money out of it is irrelevant.

Of course the forum you posted it on might have rules about what you can and can't post, but that's completely separate to the law.

 

[ianjmatt]

Of course, when you shoot in film it does mean you can't really remove shots. I wonder how someone would react then?

 

[Southdowns]

Of course, when you shoot in film it does mean you can't really remove shots. I wonder how someone would react then?

I don't think the issue is deleting it from the camera, it's about removing it from a forum.

 

[ianjmatt]

I don't think the issue is deleting it from the camera, it's about removing it from a forum.

OH - OK :bonk:

It is interesting though - I wonder how someone would react if they asked to see a shot I had taken or to delete a shot I had taken, and I explain I couldn't as it is on a roll of film.

 

[Southdowns]

They'd probably look at you all agog and ask "what's film?"!!!!!!!

On an aside, the point at which I realised how much technology has moved forward since my childhood was the point at which we gave my (then) 5 year old daughter a left over disposable film camera one day, and caught her looking at the back in confusion, pushing and prodding at it, to try and see the picture she'd just taken. She simply couldn't get her head around the idea that she had to wait!

 

[ianjmatt]

They'd probably look at you all agog and ask "what's film?"!!!!!!!

On an aside, the point at which I realised how much technology has moved forward since my childhood was the point at which we gave my (then) 5 year old daughter a left over disposable film camera one day, and caught her looking at the back in confusion, pushing and prodding at it, to try and see the picture she'd just taken. She simply couldn't get her head around the idea that she had to wait!

My (then) four year old did something similar. A friend of mine had an old eMac (one of the big white ones with computer, screen everything all in one piece of curvy white plastic) that I took off his hands. He brought it round, stuck it on the dining table and watched in fascination as my kiddie staring pushing the screen and asking why it wasn't working.

 

[MartynK]

They'd probably look at you all agog and ask "what's film?"!!!!!!!

On an aside, the point at which I realised how much technology has moved forward since my childhood was the point at which we gave my (then) 5 year old daughter a left over disposable film camera one day, and caught her looking at the back in confusion, pushing and prodding at it, to try and see the picture she'd just taken. She simply couldn't get her head around the idea that she had to wait!

My son, who was about 25 at the time, did the same thing when I bought my 30D. He'd never come across a digital camera that didn't have a 'live view' screen on the back and thought it wasn't switched on.

 

[simonblue]

bit like the thousands and thousands of people photographed on google maps

Or by CCTV,every day

 

[ZoneV]

bit like the thousands and thousands of people photographed on google maps

Of which I am one (much to my surprise, I can tell you! ). They do blur faces, though.

 

[Southdowns]

My son, who was about 25 at the time, did the same thing when I bought my 30D. He'd never come across a digital camera that didn't have a 'live view' screen on the back and thought it wasn't switched on.

Ah yes, my wife still holds my camera up in front of her whenever she borrows it. Takes her a few moments to remember to use the viewfinder

 

[clairewadey]

I'm the complete opposite and always put the camera straight up to my eye. Got a few laughs when I did this with my Husband's camera at a family christening!