|
fatcat
Nov 13, 2011, 11:10 AM
Post #1 of 14
(6813 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 13, 2004
Posts: 20
|
I'd like to take some pictures at the local climbing wall's bouldering/tooling competitions.
Just wondering what the etiquete is for seeking consent is ? I wont be using the images for anything other than practicing with a new lens/body.
Any advice ?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
sonso45
Nov 13, 2011, 4:01 PM
Post #2 of 14
(6782 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 1, 2002
Posts: 997
|
If you aren't publishing photos then you should be fine. The newspapers, TV cameras all catch people and do not seek permission of the folks on film.
Although, it might be the polite thing to ask if you want to post a photo. I take lot of pics and just tell whomever if they mind my posting a pic. I try to get a name for info purposes.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Nov 13, 2011, 11:52 PM
Post #3 of 14
(6714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
sonso45 wrote: The newspapers, TV cameras all catch people and do not seek permission of the folks on film.
Read here: http://www.danheller.com/...-release-primer.html
I'd suggest that the OP discuss it with the gym owners. Maybe even finagle a press pass.
|
|
|
|
|
sonso45
Nov 14, 2011, 1:50 AM
Post #4 of 14
(6679 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 1, 2002
Posts: 997
|
Thanks for the correction. I thought a competition at a gym would be a public event though. My bad.
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Nov 14, 2011, 5:51 AM
Post #5 of 14
(6634 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
marc801 wrote: sonso45 wrote: The newspapers, TV cameras all catch people and do not seek permission of the folks on film. Actually, they do - very religiously - in those situations when it's necessary, since it's incredibly easy to sue them and win if they publish your picture without your consent.
Only easy to sue them and win if the photos are used inappropriately or for commercial purpose.Public places and events, accident scenes, and law enforcement generally do not require a model release.
never need unless the shots are being used for advertising. Then model releases and property releases are definitely needed.
In reply to: The big issue isn't the taking of photos, it's publishing them. Yes, posting on the web, even in a discussion forum, is publishing. Read here: http://www.danheller.com/...-release-primer.html Publishing them for editorial purpose, as long as the content is actually what the photo is and you're fine. The issues comes when a photo is published to advertise and the people or property in the image is released. (USA Speaking) Some issues with military and national defense things too. In reply to: I'd suggest that the OP discuss it with the gym owners. Maybe even finagle a press pass. I agree, tell the gym owner you want to shoot photos. He may or may not grant you special access. I bet he won't mind you shooting from the audience regardless. I do what I can to get a release when ever I can. Even if I have no vision of licensing the image for advertising. Images with people that have no release, I market only for Editorial content.
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Nov 14, 2011, 2:33 PM
Post #6 of 14
(6594 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
this guy: http://www.photo-bob.net/USAC.htm
takes pictures at youth comps. I've seen multiple pictures of my own kids on his site and I know he hasn't sought us out for any kind of release. Maybe the release is built into the comp or USAC waiver, I don't really pay much attention to it.
|
|
|
|
|
djlachelt
Nov 14, 2011, 4:30 PM
Post #7 of 14
(6566 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2005
Posts: 261
|
I learned something this weekend... we hosted a high school comp and some of the competitors happen to be from a local program for kids that have had some trouble with the law (e.g. on probation), so are not in a traditional HS.
The director of the program mentioned to me that photos of their kids could not legally be posted publicly (like in the newspaper or on a web-site). This wasn't an issue of consent... rather some thing that law-enforcement authorities have stipulated.
I'm not sure what the legal issue is, or why that rule is in place. It might be related to the fact that they are minors. And it may be to ensure that someone does not exploit the kids... "Hey, look what good citizens we are, we're working with kids who've broken the law!"
I'm not sure what the consequences are for unknowingly posting some such photos. Probably not bad.
If you might end-up posting the photos, that would be a good reason to simply ask competitors if you could take their picture.
(This post was edited by djlachelt on Nov 14, 2011, 4:33 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
sp115
Nov 14, 2011, 5:10 PM
Post #8 of 14
(6556 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 17, 2007
Posts: 515
|
fatcat wrote: I'd like to take some pictures at the local climbing wall's bouldering/tooling competitions. Just wondering what the etiquete is for seeking consent is ? I wont be using the images for anything other than practicing with a new lens/body. Any advice ? Thanks
As far as etiquette: ask politely if photos are ok, then don't be a nuisance by getting anyone's way or by blasting a giant flash and you'll be fine.
As for legality: In the situation and usage you describe, you have zero concern
http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm
(This post was edited by sp115 on Nov 14, 2011, 5:10 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Nov 14, 2011, 6:33 PM
Post #9 of 14
(6528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
Nope. That page and the rights document refers to *public* spaces - the interior of a climbing gym is not. The gym can easily assert that it owns the copyright of all photos taken on premises.
|
|
|
|
|
fatcat
Nov 14, 2011, 7:31 PM
Post #10 of 14
(6496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 13, 2004
Posts: 20
|
Thanks for all the replies.
I approached the owners and they seemed very unsure - dont think anyone has ever asked them before
|
|
|
|
|
sp115
Nov 14, 2011, 7:40 PM
Post #11 of 14
(6492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 17, 2007
Posts: 515
|
marc801 wrote: Nope. That page and the rights document refers to *public* spaces - the interior of a climbing gym is not. The gym can easily assert that it owns the copyright of all photos taken on premises.
With all due respect Marc, I don't believe that to be true in theory or in practise with repspect to the usage the OP described. From the second pargraph of the link I've provided:
"Property owners may legally prohibit
photography on their premises
but have no right to prohibit others
from photographing their property
from other locations. Whether you
need permission from property owners
to take photographs while on their
premises depends on the circumstances.
In most places, you may reasonably
assume that taking photographs
is allowed and that you do not
need explicit permission. However,
this is a judgment call and you should
request permission when the circumstances
suggest that the owner is likely
to object. In any case, when a property
owner tells you not to take photographs
while on the premises, you are
legally obligated to honor the request."
What is generally misunderstood is that, with very limited exception, the photo's you take are your property, how you can use them is what is limited by law.
(This post was edited by sp115 on Nov 14, 2011, 7:42 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Nov 14, 2011, 9:41 PM
Post #12 of 14
(6459 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
marc801 wrote: Nope. That page and the rights document refers to *public* spaces - the interior of a climbing gym is not. The gym can easily assert that it owns the copyright of all photos taken on premises.
It can assert that all it wants, but it doesn't make it so. The creator of the image owns its copyright in every single case, unless there's a prior agreement between the creator and somebody else, such as in a work for hire. I loves ya marc, friend way, but you're 100% wrong on this. The website you linked to agrees with me where it states that usage determines the need for a release, not the location in which the picture is taken. (Obvious exceptions apply, such as looking through somebody's window to take a picture of them at home. But "home" in this case is something far different from any business establishment.) Of course, the gym can prohibit photography, but that's quite different than claiming ownership of photos.
Nevertheless, OP, it would be polite to ask if people mind.
(This post was edited by j_ung on Nov 14, 2011, 9:44 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Nov 17, 2011, 2:18 AM
Post #13 of 14
(6352 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
djlachelt wrote: I learned something this weekend... we hosted a high school comp and some of the competitors happen to be from a local program for kids that have had some trouble with the law (e.g. on probation), so are not in a traditional HS.
The director of the program mentioned to me that photos of their kids could not legally be posted publicly (like in the newspaper or on a web-site). This wasn't an issue of consent... rather some thing that law-enforcement authorities have stipulated. I'm not sure what the legal issue is, or why that rule is in place. It might be related to the fact that they are minors. And it may be to ensure that someone does not exploit the kids... "Hey, look what good citizens we are, we're working with kids who've broken the law!" I'm not sure what the consequences are for unknowingly posting some such photos. Probably not bad. If you might end-up posting the photos, that would be a good reason to simply ask competitors if you could take their picture.
Legally speaking, you could still post those images. Same is true if am working down the street and a minor get arrest. I photograph the scene and uploaded to my stock site or take it to the local paper. The image can be used for Editorial purposes without any issues.
|
|
|
|
|
FullertonImages
Dec 4, 2011, 7:43 AM
Post #14 of 14
(6004 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2009
Posts: 40
|
guangzhou wrote: djlachelt wrote: I learned something this weekend... we hosted a high school comp and some of the competitors happen to be from a local program for kids that have had some trouble with the law (e.g. on probation), so are not in a traditional HS.
The director of the program mentioned to me that photos of their kids could not legally be posted publicly (like in the newspaper or on a web-site). This wasn't an issue of consent... rather some thing that law-enforcement authorities have stipulated. I'm not sure what the legal issue is, or why that rule is in place. It might be related to the fact that they are minors. And it may be to ensure that someone does not exploit the kids... "Hey, look what good citizens we are, we're working with kids who've broken the law!" I'm not sure what the consequences are for unknowingly posting some such photos. Probably not bad. If you might end-up posting the photos, that would be a good reason to simply ask competitors if you could take their picture. Legally speaking, you could still post those images. Same is true if am working down the street and a minor get arrest. I photograph the scene and uploaded to my stock site or take it to the local paper. The image can be used for Editorial purposes without any issues.
This is correct. Editorial images don't need to be model release or have consent, with the exception of covers, which still need to have releases. That being said, it certainly never hurts to have consent and/or a model release. It makes everything easier and removes all questions abou whether any certain usage is ok. Many stock agencies won't accept images that aren't released, even though they could still ell them as editorial. It's easier for them to just know that every image in their archive is released and they never have to worry about usage problems or lawsuits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
