Re: SHooting people in stereo (strangers)

[P3D Gregory J. Wageman <gjw@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Eric Goldstein cautions:

>Candids certainly make for interesting photographs. They also make for
>interesting legal issues when it comes to use of someone's image or
>likeness for commercial purposes without a release.
>
>Even entry of these images in competitions, which could easily be
>construed as promotional/commercial pursuits, has it's risks if express
>written permission is not secured.

Aren't there exceptions to this?  Lincoln Kamm mentioned paperazzi (how
*do* you spell that, anyway)...  Obviously, if a release were required
to commercially use anyone's likeness, paperazzi wouldn't exist, because
Madonna (or whomever) would simply refuse to sign such a release: end of
story.  I think celebrities as "public figures" have given up certain
rights to privacy by virtue of being a celeb, and when they appear in
public places they are fair game to be photographed.  (Their
*performances* are of course protected by copyright, which is why many
venues prohibit cameras.)

I think similarly when you go to a public place like a theme park or
similar, you also implicitly give up certain expectations of privacy,
e.g. that you will not be photographed.  I know at many concert venues
I have seen signs posted that say that you are giving your consent to
being photographed and your image used without compensation simply by
passing through the gate (at which time it's too late to do anything
about it since the tickets are non-refundable...)

Now, I am certainly not a lawyer and have no idea how valid and 
enforcable such a "consent" is...  But I know there ARE exceptions to the
"release required for commercial use" scenario.

If someone asked me NOT to take their picture, I would of course comply
out of basic politeness... but it has never happened yet, and I have
photographed joggers, inline skaters, people at playgrounds, at marine
parks, etc.

        -Greg W.


------------------------------