I don't believe there's any difference between legally aquiering and publishing photographs. Leagally aquired photographs are yours and can legally be published - unless: A necassary permission/agreement (photograps made in a private place) says you can't. The use for advertising (except advertising for your own work) requires special permission from the persons involved. Remember that legally aquired photographs can be used/published illegally - if for instance they are offending to the people in the pictures or used out of context.
I don't think the legislation is very different in the USA from that of the European countries. Except the USA legislation is said to protect comercial interests rather than those of the photographers. Check the website of your local Photographers Union. That ought to give you some straight answers. Jens Bladt Arkitekt MAA http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Glen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 16. august 2005 20:47 Til: [email protected] Emne: RE: Another Photographer's Rights Question Thanks, for everyone's comments so far. I should have mentioned that the city festival and concert that I *might* be photographing and *might* put on my personal web space is in the USA. Any references to laws only help if they apply here. (It's my fault for not mentioning my location earlier.) Also, the web site is accessible to the public without any fee, passwords, etc. I won't be selling the photos. They would be on my site, to share my experience of what I consider to be a news event. They would also be on the site to demonstrate my skills with a camera, and perhaps to provide some illustration for the techniques I used to take them. (Maybe I could offer some helpful technical advice for people wanting to take pictures under similar conditions.) take care, Glen At 02:27 PM 8/16/2005, Jens Bladt wrote: >William wrote: > >My understanding is that the act of photographing is fine, the act of > >publishing (this includes a website) is where you can run afoul of things. > >I don't agree. You can't! > >In my understanding a public website, accessible without a password or >similar, is no different from any other media, newspaper, billboard, flyer >or whatever... You can still be prosecuted for offending, slandering etc. It >has been done. > >Jens Bladt > > > >-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >Fra: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sendt: 16. august 2005 01:08 >Til: [email protected] >Emne: Re: Another Photographer's Rights Question > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Glen" >Subject: Another Photographer's Rights Question > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > There is a nearby city festival planned for next month, which will feature > > some nationally know recording artists performing in public, and there is > > no admission fee for the event whatsoever. Since the performance is > > viewable from public sidewalks, and there is no restriction on viewing the > > event, and no fees are charged to the public, can I photograph this event > > and put the images on my personal web space? > >My understanding is that the act of photographing is fine, the act of >publishing (this includes a website) is where you can run afoul of things. > >There seems now to be a presumption of misdeeds in society at large. If you >are shooting, it will probably be presumed that it is for profit. I know >people have a hard time dealing with my appearance (SHUT UP NORM!!) when I >am out shooting, as it is often with big cameras, or big lenses. >While I have never really been verbally assaulted, and never told to pack up >and go home, it wouldn't surprise me if the attitude was different in a less >laid back locale than the one I live in. > >William Robb > > > > > > > >-- >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.10/73 - Release Date: 8/15/2005
