Quandary.....

[CMC122]

Very well said Catt.

 

[itsbob]

You know what would be fun? Get prints of the pictures, let's all go to Rondevous, party down and look at them! That way we can see the pics and nobody has to worry about becoming famous on the SomdSMIB site or some guy whacking off on you.

Who's always thinkin'? :tapsnoggin:

I'm with you.. pick a date after this week-end!!

 

[crabcake]

No but it was the first one in my recollection where when someone said "I really don't want my pics posted, or if you have to blot me out" and they were called whinners or crybabies.

Not true!

It's just the first time someone called someone else "whiner" or "crybaby" in regards to the subject in the public forum.

 

[nomoney]

I'm with you.. pick a date after this week-end!!

I guarantee most of the ones that show up won't even be in any of the pics

 

[crabcake]

Actually, that's not true. Whenever a reporter or cameraman snaps a pic or footage that will be made public, they must have a release signed by the people in the picture. The only exception is when it's a crowd shot and nobody stands out as obviously recognizable. When we'd show up at clubs on a busy night to get footage for a commercial, we had EVERYONE sign a release. And there were always those who objected to being filmed and we would simply let them know we were filming and they'd move out of the shot.

You know when you're watching a cop show and some of the faces are blurred? Those people didn't sign the release.

But we're not talking about filming a commercial here ... it's more "personal use/pleasure" pictures. I thought the release was so that they couldn't come back and ask for money down the road as well.

 

[itsbob]

No thanks. It was obviously a mistake to go to this last one. This is one of the reasons I stopped going to forum functions.

It was for a worthy cause, and a good reason to come out.. it was NOT a mistake.

Have the forums got THIS PC and warm fuzzy feeling that a guy can't even pick on someone anymore??

 

[itsbob]

Not true!

It's just the first time someone called someone else "whiner" or "crybaby" in regards to the subject in the public forum.

Yeah so there.. You tell him..

 

[crabcake]

Have the forums got THIS PC and warm fuzzy feeling that a guy can't even pick on someone anymore??

Worse ... even us chics can't do it without being called classless.

 

[mAlice]

It was for a worthy cause, and a good reason to come out.. it was NOT a mistake.

Have the forums got THIS PC and warm fuzzy feeling that a guy can't even pick on someone anymore??

It has nothing to do with being PC. I see your shovel is working well for you.

Worthy cause or not, I won't help somd with anymore fundraisers.

 

[vraiblonde]

But we're not talking about filming a commercial here ... it's more "personal use/pleasure" pictures. I thought the release was so that they couldn't come back and ask for money down the road as well.

The release is predominately to protect the privacy of those who do not wish to have their likeness in the public domain. The internet is the ULTIMATE public domain, reaching far more people than a newspaper or TV program ever dreamed of.

Trust me on this - I used to work at a TV station.

 

[itsbob]

Don't need shovel, I'm standing on firm ground..

 

[crabcake]

The release is predominately to protect the privacy of those who do not wish to have their likeness in the public domain. The internet is the ULTIMATE public domain, reaching far more people than a newspaper or TV program ever dreamed of.

Trust me on this - I used to work at a TV station.

I don't doubt you on it ... I was never in TV ... just journalism. But I thought there was a difference in release authority based on intended use. I fully admit I may be wrong, though.

So who bartended this one?

 

[itsbob]

The release is predominately to protect the privacy of those who do not wish to have their likeness in the public domain. The internet is the ULTIMATE public domain, reaching far more people than a newspaper or TV program ever dreamed of.

Trust me on this - I used to work at a TV station.

But there are NO protections of your privacy in a public setting.. it's been to court a hundred times, and it's been said over and over.. you can't expect privacy in a public place..

There are parents trying to sue, and get dirty old men arrested for taking pictures of their daughters cheerleading at football games.. but their daughters are flaunting what they got in public so nothing the courts can do about it, and there are no signed realease statements..

 

[nomoney]

Worthy cause or not, I won't help somd with anymore fundraisers.

all because you don't want your pic posted and someone called you a whiner


Thats showing them! I think I'm going to take my toys and go home too! :hmmpfh::slam:

 

[jwwb2000]

Well I guess Catamaran's needs to have a lot of privacy acts papers signed then. They have a lot of pics uploaded to their website

 

[itsbob]

It has nothing to do with being PC. I see your shovel is working well for you.

Worthy cause or not, I won't help somd with anymore fundraisers.

OK, so how much do you think you were responsible for at this fundraiser.. I don't want anyone to think I'm responsible for lost revenue to a good cause!!

 

[mAlice]

OK, so how much do you think you were responsible for at this fundraiser.. I don't want anyone to think I'm responsible for lost revenue to a good cause!!

I'm sure my donations won't be missed in the future, regardless of what they are.

 

[vraiblonde]

But there are NO protections of your privacy in a public setting.. it's been to court a hundred times, and it's been said over and over.. you can't expect privacy in a public place..

There are parents trying to sue, and get dirty old men arrested for taking pictures of their daughters cheerleading at football games.. but their daughters are flaunting what they got in public so nothing the courts can do about it, and there are no signed realease statements..

If the pic is for your own personal use, that's one thing. If you intend to make it available to the public at-large, that is indeed a violation of privacy.

Celebrities and politicians are exempt from this because they are public figures who are, by the very nature of their jobs, consenting to being in the public domain and have forfeited a good bit of their legal privacy.

If you take a picture of Britney Spears and post it on the internet, she's out of luck. If you take a picture of a jr. high school cheerleader at a game and post it on the internet, her parents can sue you and win because she has not consented to having her privacy violated in this manner.

The only thing you can't do with a public figure is use their likeness to make money, via t-shirts or other merchandise, without their consent.

 

[HollowSoul]

It doesn't bother me to have my pic posted,
just make sure you got my good side



















wait a minuite............












































I dont have a good side

 

[vraiblonde]

Here you go:
http://www.nolo.com/product.cfm/objectID/2C02C865-21E7-497C-9DDDBA058175FFA1/sampleChapter/6/310

Explains the basics of public domain and privacy issues. Even though it's off-topic because we're not talking about legalities here, simply respect for individuals who do not want their photograph displayed on the internet.