Who owns your image?
Nov. 29th, 2009 01:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pandora_parrotWhat do you get when you mix a bunch of traumatized, stressed-out people with a ton of alcohol and a failure to communicate? You get a lot of yelling and hurt feelings. i.e. DRAMUH...
Although the party yesterday was awesome, it ended on a bit of a sour note with a bit of a conflict regarding privacy, property, and photography. I think the situation was badly handled by all involved and could have been bettered handled if people were A) sober, B) able to communicate more clearly with one another and C) not stressed out or traumatized about a million other things.
Although the situation is now more or less resolved, it lead to some interesting discussion on the nature of photography, privacy, and related concepts. Various topics were discussed, such as, "Who owns your likeness?" and "Is it assault to take a photo of an unwilling subject?" Although we pretty much determined the answers to these things in the legal sense, I felt that we had not fully explored all of the avenues of thought regarding the answers to these questions in the social sense.
To give you an example of what I mean, the paparazzi that follow celebrities around are well within their rights legally (at least sometimes), but socially, they are performing the unethical act of taking away a celebrity's privacy. One might describe them as the scum of the earth in this sense.
Socially, it is vital for reporters and journalists to take photos of situations and people as part of their freedom of the press to present information to the public. The law also supports this social rule.
The situation we had was nothing like any of this as the people involved were a hell of a lot more reasonable, but I think it's an interesting philosophical question. Who owns your image? What is an appropriate response to an uncooperative photographer? What about to a cooperative one?
So... I thought I'd take a poll to see what people think about this. I'd also love to read your thoughts on the topic. Please explain your answers in comments, if you like. I will not be responding, however, because of my closeness to the actual situation. I am still intrigued by the general/abstract question at hand, though. And keep in mind that I'm not talking about the legal realities/ramifications of any of this. Just the social realities/rules/mores/etc.
btw: The multiple choice of "reasonable reaction" is assuming you've asked the person to delete/destroy the image, and they refuse.
[Poll #1492015]
Although the party yesterday was awesome, it ended on a bit of a sour note with a bit of a conflict regarding privacy, property, and photography. I think the situation was badly handled by all involved and could have been bettered handled if people were A) sober, B) able to communicate more clearly with one another and C) not stressed out or traumatized about a million other things.
Although the situation is now more or less resolved, it lead to some interesting discussion on the nature of photography, privacy, and related concepts. Various topics were discussed, such as, "Who owns your likeness?" and "Is it assault to take a photo of an unwilling subject?" Although we pretty much determined the answers to these things in the legal sense, I felt that we had not fully explored all of the avenues of thought regarding the answers to these questions in the social sense.
To give you an example of what I mean, the paparazzi that follow celebrities around are well within their rights legally (at least sometimes), but socially, they are performing the unethical act of taking away a celebrity's privacy. One might describe them as the scum of the earth in this sense.
Socially, it is vital for reporters and journalists to take photos of situations and people as part of their freedom of the press to present information to the public. The law also supports this social rule.
The situation we had was nothing like any of this as the people involved were a hell of a lot more reasonable, but I think it's an interesting philosophical question. Who owns your image? What is an appropriate response to an uncooperative photographer? What about to a cooperative one?
So... I thought I'd take a poll to see what people think about this. I'd also love to read your thoughts on the topic. Please explain your answers in comments, if you like. I will not be responding, however, because of my closeness to the actual situation. I am still intrigued by the general/abstract question at hand, though. And keep in mind that I'm not talking about the legal realities/ramifications of any of this. Just the social realities/rules/mores/etc.
btw: The multiple choice of "reasonable reaction" is assuming you've asked the person to delete/destroy the image, and they refuse.
[Poll #1492015]
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-11-30 07:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-11-30 07:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-11-30 07:26 pm (UTC)Can you suggest an improvement?
no subject
Date: 2009-11-30 07:33 pm (UTC)and no...I don't know that that could be worded any better. I just don't like the *other* choices listed (I'll admit that I can't think of any other options that are not violent/hostile but are still proactive though)
no subject
Date: 2009-11-30 07:35 pm (UTC)