Oh. Understood... Well, jolly good.
On 1/18/2011 3:30 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
On Jan 18, 2011, at 8:22 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
The first amendment is a well good rule/law for me... I mean not me
personally, as I am not US citizen, but hmmm, well you surely
understand what I mean.
So, effectively, sand the awkward language I was stating the right
thing.
It has to be determined (as in lawyer sense of the word) what is
the purpose of PPG. Because if it is to promote Pentax (which is
pretty logical thing, methinks) then indeed releases would be
necessary as you stated, Paul. And if my understanding is correct,
PPG is an American enterprise, thereby acting as per American law.
Boris
The stated -- and published -- purpose of the gallery is to show the
work of Pentax photographers. It's not really a forum for advertising
and no products are promoted there. No releases are legally
necessary. The NY Times is owned by the Times Corporation and the
various services of that company are promoted within the paper. That
doesn't mean that the images shown within require releases. They are
provided solely for viewing pleasure and information -- just like
those in the Pentax gallery. Paul
On 1/18/2011 3:05 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
As far as I know we don't have a rule or law -- other than the
first amendment to the Constitution. -- that says you can take
pictures of people in public. But we have court precedents. You
don't need model releases for pictures or people taken in public
unless they're used for profit in a promotion of some sort. The
people who manage the Pentax Gallery seem to have a rather
limited understanding of both legal requirements and the
methodology of digital photography. In determining whether a pic
is appropriate for submission, I think it's best to let common
sense prevail. Paul On Jan 18, 2011, at 4:22 AM, Boris Liberman
wrote:
On 1/18/2011 2:12 AM, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
"It is the sole responsibility of the submitting photographer
to obtain a written release from any _recognizable_ [emphasis
mine] person in a submitted photo."
Don't you have a rule/law in your country whereas if you take
a picture of a person in public and don't use it for
profit/publicity/etc then you /don't need/ to have a written
release therefrom?
I've a pic in there that shows faces... No problems this far.
Boris
-- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE
from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
-- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from
the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the
directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
