Re: Photography and the Law

In message <4825512b$1_2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, PDM 
<pdcm99minus@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes
><snip>
>>> What is the situation regarding "model releases"? I understand that
they
>>> are
>>> required for commercial photography, but aren't newspaper photos
>>> considered
>>> as such? I'm sure Fred West (and other infamous individuals) didn't
have
>>> to
>>> sign permission before the Sun could publish his "perp. walk".
>>
>> You can photograph anyone in a public place as long as their photo is
not
>> used for commercial purposes.  If you wish to use that persons image
for
>> commercial purposes (i.e. to promote or advertise) then a model release
>> form is required.
>>
>> MC
>To clarify this: If you sell a picture of a general scene which contains
>people, to say a calendar company, you don't need release forms. It you
>specifically sell an image of a person or persons for advertising or
>promotion you do. It's a tricky one really and depends on the use and
common
>sense.

The problem is you cited "common sense"  which is not  defined in law 
:-)
As you say it gets tricky.  However in a public place you can not be 
stopped for taking photos for private, non commercial use.

The other problem definition is "public place"   Most if not all places 
other than the street  are owned.  Churches, town halls, "public" parks 
etc.

As has been said it is usually better to ask forgiveness than 
permission. However often those who challenge you on taking photos don't 
know the law and think that it is illegal to photograph children, people 
and places.

Caution should be advised along with polite non-confrontational 
discourse. Telling people to "sod off" will only get you in more trouble 
and things like breach of the peace.
-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/