can someone take your photo in a private place?

"andy" said:
Nothing at all! Well except your morals . This is why paparazzi are mostly scum
Click to expand...

Exactly this!

Just out of curiosity why do you want the pictures down? (I may have missed it if already mentioned in the thread). Are the pictures normal or embarrassing etc. If it's the latter then I could understand why you'd want them removed. Otherwise I can't see any justified reason to remove them.
 
Skidder said:
Most bands hate free publicity.
Click to expand...

I was thinking this was the more important question myself! :)

As a small band, surely having photos of you on the internet is a good thing, unless they've been used in some kind of manner to defame them.
 
dfarrall said:
Not at all, a pub is private property.

You do need permission to enter, but the permission is presumed as it is a pub.
You cannot be thrown off public property by anyone other than law enforcement, because its public!
Click to expand...

It might be a private building, it is very much classed as an enclosed public area, which is why smoking ban affected them.
 
A public house is private property (please stop saying "place").

However, seeing he was there and took photographs at the time, thus allowed entrance and stayed and was not thrown out. Then he had permission to be there?

Urgo, he had as much right to be in the pub as the band members. Logic would conclude that since he had permission to be there, and the photos belong to him. I can't see what you can do, unless he sells prints of that, in which (if your faces are identifiable) then could pursue a claim for royalties.

If he just put them on his blog and not making direct sales from the print then it would be hard to argue that you have suffered a loss.

That is your key point here. Have you loss anything from the photographer using this photograph and can you prove it and more over, quantify it?
 
godinman said:
1221big.jpg


Show me on the bear where he touched you.
Click to expand...

lol, post of the day

B@
 
Glaucus said:
It might be a private building, it is very much classed as an enclosed public area, which is why smoking ban affected them.
Click to expand...

Of course, i wasnt disputing that.

Smoking ban has more to do with the place than the property, do a degree obviously!
 
As others have said it all comes down to is a pub a public place.

Saying that, what on earth do they expect? It's a band playing in a pub!

When people go to a concert they take cameras with them to take pictures of the band. Now interestingly plenty of places don't let you take telescopic lenses etc... Presumably this is on the basis that certain photographers have to be granted access to close up photos of the band...

kd
 
Did you have a reasonable expectation of privacy?

If you are in a pub, then no you didn't (unless you had hired a seperate area for exclusive use). You were in an area that, regardless of ownership, the general public have access to.

If you were in your own bedroom, or a swimming pool cubicle, etc then you did.

There is a difference between being allowed to take your photo and using a photo that is identifiably of you for profit though (with a myriad of exceptions, conditions, etc). Model releases etc would be needed in the latter case.
 
Spenty said:
So how come parents at schools need to sign forms regarding end of year photo's?
Click to expand...

They do? I would have thought the forms ask because if you do not intend to purchase the photo, why bother taking it in the first place? Or perhaps because the schools in question respect privacy greater than what the law requires.

It's nothing to do with age, at least legally anyway.
 
unless the band members are snorting coke while dressed in a nazzi uniforms, or one has his wang in the back side of a donkey where is the harm in the photos? why care..

no one is ever going to see the pictures and even if they do they will not recoganise who it is ...
 
hopeful_builder said:
A friends band played at a Pub, and some chump they dont like took photos of the band in and out of the pub and posted them online to add to his portfolio, despite not asking for permission and several requests to remove them they are still there
Click to expand...

Perfectly legal, especially when outside the pub.

This pub may also not be classed as private. He was given free access to the pub, the band and the use of his camera. If the pub landlord allowed his entry and use of the camera then there is no case. To be made.


A friend was playing in a ban, why the hell wouldn't he want his photo taken. Next time he can wear a paper bag over his head
 
Last edited:
Haggisman said:
I would have thought the fact that he is using them in a commercial manner without your permission would be the issue, rather than just the fact he took them?

Surely there must be something the OP can do about this, otherwise e.g. what's to stop you taking pictures of girls in bikinis at the beach and selling the pictures in a calendar or setting up a website to sell them?

Edit: A couple of possibly relevant points taken from: http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/documents/ip_photography.htm#3.1



Is it possible one of your band members was wearing a t-shirt or so with a clearly visible logo?

Also



You could potentially use the argument that by making these photos available, he is potentially causing financial damage to your own designated photographer?
Click to expand...

That is for for selling the photos,a and even then only under certain circumstances. Taking the photo and putting it online makes any of that irrelevant. He can print them out and put them on His wall, or give them to friends. He can sell the photos to a newspaper. He can photoshop out the labels, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom