how is what i'm saying inconsistent? if the law did not exist the police would not have grabbed the guy. the whole point was the law exists. keep one thing in mind if an officer says you were doing 80 and you swear you were going 70...the judge will most likely believe the officer. point being...you're filming people without their consent, if one of them complains and you don't have proof they will win a lawsuit. to repeat if you interview someone and tell them it's for one thing, but then it ends up on the internet or used in some way that wasn't "put on paper" and you go to court without proof of consent, once again you lose a lawsuit.
back to the gym...parents filming their kid(s) playing. the focus of the tape if played in a court of law. the video will show the game, sure there are people in the background, but they are not the focus of the taping. whereas the guy was walking around specifically taking pictures of girls...in a court of law a judge will see nothing but girls (no pictures of the game) and ask if the girls gave their consent and he'll want paper not verbal conset. since he has none, off to jail he goes. plus i gave a perfect example of the US checkpoint. you as a common citizen cannot take pictures at the checkpoint, but someone with press credentials can. ah why am i even trying? for anyone if you want to go ahead shoot what you want, when you want, and use it however you want. then when you get sued, print this message and see how much weight it has in court :-D ..."well lancer said i could do it." --- In [email protected], Michael Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yea there are lots of levels to this. As in the example given by > lancer777, there is a lot of info not available that would help to > explain and even his example is an inconsistent example of the point he > is trying to make...ie the parents obvioiusly are filming without > releases while the other fellow he cited was thrown out for doing the > same thing.. Getting back to my earlier point; the practical side is > that while laws may exist that forbid certain things, they may be > difficult to enforce and the remedy may be too expensive for the > offended party to enforce. > This are not criminal acts that you report to the police and the > offender is hauled off to jail. > Some of you may be aware that some mp3s may be illegal copies but this > fact has hardly slowed the provision of equipment IPODs for example to > exploit these crimes. I am not advocating getting permission from the > people you film, its is also good manners if not strictly enforceable law. > > Mike S > > mperry wrote: > > >Ladies and Gents, > >One more angle to add to the blog is if for example you have a person that lives at a state home (example Ellisville State School in Ellisville, Ms. Home for mentally challenged people.) you will need to get a a release signed by a Legal Parent etc. no matter the age to shoot the person. > >----- Original Message ----- > > From: lancer777 > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 2:19 AM > > Subject: Re: [AP] permission to videotape > > > > > > the horse could always use another kick... > > > > it was a basketball game...parents were videotaping the game (their > > kids) no one stopped them, but the guy taking pictures of girls was > > getting escorted out by the guys in blue up until the official stopped > > the game, ran after them, and explained the situation. > > > > and it's not my statute...it's state law. did you read the other 2 links? > > > > by the way while i was shooting for one of the clips i posted > > here...more than once did police officers ask me what i was doing. > > > > matter of fact a guy came through town and took a bunch of pictures of > > girls and yes they gave him permission...don't know if they signed > > anything. the guy told them the pictures were just for him and swore > > they weren't going to be on the internet...and guess what? every last > > one of them is a mouse click away. > > > > as for filming on property...in texas you cannot film on government > > property without permission. speaking of...say you decide to visit > > mexico and you and your friends pose for a couple of pictures at the > > border crossing checkpoint...say goodbye to your camera. unless you > > get permission from the federal government you cannot take any type of > > photograph. now the media does it all the time because they have the > > rights to do so...remember free press...but you as a citizen, student > > filmmaker or even hollywood heavyweight cannot shoot at the crossing > > checkpoint. > > > > to prove my point for those of you who saw "day after tomorrow" the > > border crossing was a set and not the actual crossing. they shut down > > a freeway overpass and converted it into the scene you saw. the people > > crossing the river were told if they get to the other side (mexico) > > they weren't allowed to come back. during the shoot actual border > > patrol agents were mixed in with the extras to make sure. > > > > speaking of permits and permission. you cannot set up your camera on > > the sidewalk to shoot your house. why? it's part of the roadway so to > > do so you need to go downtown and get a street permit even though you > > are not shooting the street. now how many people do so? and how many > > officers drive around to find anyone doing so? > > > > point is if you are involved in shooting features, shorts, > > documentaries and are not a member of the press then you need to get > > permissions when involving people, places, and things. > > > > if you do so and anyone involved says you didn't get their permission > > then they have every right to file a lawsuit. just to note Texas is > > the most litiguous state in the US...shared with California. > > > > --- In [email protected], Michael Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > Just to beat this to death a school is not a public place with no > > > restrictions. I was once trying to take a shot of background mountains > > > from a school property and a principle stopped me. They dont allow > > > camera's in just any old circumstance as sometimes parents in custody > > > battles are trying to get evidence. As for your statute, I dont see > > how > > > it is enforceable or no one would be taking pictures/video's outside > > of > > > a private residence. > > > > > > mike S > > > > > > lancer777 wrote: > > > > > > >this is a true story...i was at a high school basketball game. this > > > >guy (probably 18 to 20) was walking around taking pictures of girls. > > > >he was asking them and they posed for him. then 2 of the girls told > > > >the officers on duty and they grabbed the guy and started escorting > > > >him out of the gym. long story, short, he didn't get arrested. one of > > > >the referees vouched for him. > > > > > > > >rare case...take a picture of someone under witness protection...then > > > >see how much law you need ;-) > > > > > > > >http://www.simslaw.com/model/model_releases.htm > > > >http://www.ronbutlerlaw.com/article.jsp?practArea=20&articleIndex=1 > > > > > > > >here's actual state law not opinion :-) > > > > > > > >� 21.15. IMPROPER PHOTOGRAPHY OR VISUAL > > > >RECORDING. (a) In this section, "promote" has the meaning > > > >assigned by Section 43.21. > > > > (b) A person commits an offense if the > > > >person: > > > > (1) photographs or by videotape or other electronic > > > >means visually records another: > > > > (A) without the other person's consent[0]; > > > > > > > >--- In [email protected], Michael Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>Perhaps some actual Texas statutes would be important here; I think > > > >>there may be some truth to what you say but I think this is still > > > >> > > > >> > > > >more > > > > > > > > > > > >>opinion than actual law. > > > >> > > > >>Mike > > > >> > > > >>lancer777 wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>>ahhhh...michael, michael, michael. > > > >>> > > > >>>news media has "free reign"...they can go almost anywhere to shoot > > > >>>anybody and put it on the news. the average joe with no credentials > > > >>>can't just shoot and interview people without their consent. some > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >guy > > > > > > > > > > > >>>walks up "hey i'm doing this for school." next thing you know > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >you're > > > > > > > > > > > >>>on the internet and being slammed for having an opinion. the actual > > > >>>texas law is intended to protect minors. so if you want to > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >interview > > > > > > > > > > > >>>people and you are "freelance" you need to have release forms > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >signed. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>ever see the show "cheaters"...filmed in texas...ever noticed there > > > >>>were people with their faces blurred? > > > >>> > > > >>>--- In [email protected], Michael Snell > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>>>I hardly see how that can work in practical terms ...how can tv > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >run the > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>news? When they shoot a crowd they have the consent of al?, when > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >a > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>politician appears to make a speech...come on! > > > >>>> > > > >>>>Mike > > > >>>> > > > >>>>lancer777 wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>>>In texas you'd have to get permission and better have it signed > > > >>>>>because it's law. could be jail time shooting anyone without > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >their > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>consent. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>--- In [email protected], Michael Snell > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>wrote: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>>I think the law might vary from place to place but my > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>understanding is > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>>that if you are in public you are fair game to have your pic/ > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >video > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>taken. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>>It would be considered good manners to get permission but a > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >crowd > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>situation would make that unfeasible. > > > >>>>>>I am less certain that the person taking is allowed to use it > > > >>>>>>commercially without your release ..I know the girls gone wild > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >guys > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>always get releases from the girls even if they appear to be > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >more > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>than > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>>willing participants. I think "news" might also be in a > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >different > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>category.Any ideas people? > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>Mike S > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>rmartin215 wrote: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>If one films somebody walking down the street, or itnerviews > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >them > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>briefly, is some kind of written permission necessary? Or, > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >better > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>yet, what are the circumstances when written permission is > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>necessary > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>>>and when it is not. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>randall martin > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>>Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Adobe-Premiere/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Adobe-Premiere/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
