photosecrets.com — "Before you take that photo, you may need permission for the following: Photographing buildings, works of art, or other copyrighted items; Photographing people; Photographing on public or private property. In this short article, attorney Dianne Brinson briefly discusses when permission may be required."
Sep 29, 2006 View in Crawl 4
ksudesignerSep 30, 2006
She took the picture with your camera...does that mean you own the negatives? Copyright belongs to whoever owns the original negatives usually. You won't find any professional photographer giving you their negatives without paying an astronomical fee to hand over full rights to you. And no, just because you cropped, blurred and changed the tones does not give you rights to use it if she owns the rights. You can use copyrighted material if it is altered enough...though how much altering is "enough" is highly debatable so the practice generally isn't recommended.
mikeyjwSep 30, 2006
Way to go. This article is from 1997. You managed to get a 9 year old article to the front page on digg. Are you going for the record or something?<a class="user" href="http://web.archive.org/web/19980114060352/photosecrets.com/p14.html">http://web.archive.org/web/19980114060352/photosecrets.com/p14.html</a>
kuwanSep 30, 2006
I didn't have any problems when I took my D70 there, nor when I took my D200:<a class="user" href="http://cutterpillow.com/component/option,com_gallery2/Itemid,32/?g2_itemId=130">http://cutterpillow.com/component/option,com_gallery2/Itemid,32/?g2_itemId=130</a>Of course it was opening night so maybe they were a little more relaxed.
Closed AccountSep 30, 2006
KSUdesigner couldn't be more wrong. The copyright of a photo belongs to the photographer. The person who pressed the shutter. If you borrowed a friend's camera and took a picture with his film or his memory card, you own the copyright on that photo the instant you press the shutter. It does not matter who owns the camera or film.Photographers won't sell you the negatives because you can now make copies with them. Even if they sold you the negatives, the photographer still owns the rights to it unless it has been assigned to you in writing. Same for a digital photo. Even if a photographer sold you the original digital file, he still owns the rights to it.
5blocksfreeSep 30, 2006
Question: where is the line between publishing and sharing (There are many places on the net that allow you to share your photos).
mp3dogSep 30, 2006
Why are all you DUMB@SSES using the Eiffel Tower as an example when discussing U.S. laws??? French law is totally irrelevant here.
roguepixelSep 30, 2006
Sweet at this rate I will have to become some sort of tree hugging hippy, then I can communicate with the trees and as their permisson to take their photographs when I am out on holiday.One upon a time stuff like this didn't happen/wasn't so bad. But if there is cashy money to be made from this then lets screw over people/artists.
footprintxSep 30, 2006
Great article, I wish more people understood this stuff. I'm a real estate appraiser, and very little is scarier than driving through Compton taking pictures of houses and the people doing drug deals in front of them. At least a couple times a month, someone will stop me while I'm taking a picture of their recently purchased house and ask me WTF I'm doing.It hasn't ever led to anything, but people get edgy when their photographs are being taken.
globalscoutSep 30, 2006
What protects individuals in their homes, gym locker room, or public toilet is Assumed Expectation of Privacy. Whenever someone is outside in public there can be no expectation of privacy, that is what the paparazzi capitalize upon.
mikeyjwSep 30, 2006
WTF am I getting dugg down for? This really is a 9 year old article (excerpted from a 9 year old book). Pardon me if I thought the front page of digg was supposed to be for actual NEWS.If you want to participate in endless rehashes of age-old issues, that's fine. Go check out DejaNews, or find a vi vs. emacs flame war to join in on. Just don't shoot me down for pointing out that this stuff is old news.
missingnaptimeOct 22, 2008
As well as the fact that they consider anything about celebrities "newsworthy" (ugh...I get so sick of celebrity "news"!)