Photographs in public

Thirdfox

Can people take whatever photos they want if it's in a public arena e.g. Grafton street?

Don't people need permission to take a picture of a specific person?

BTW the people who are taking the photos are not journalists... just people who own a camera i.e. not for commercial use.

besty

I think you need permission from the person in the photos if you are going to republish/broadcast it.

rugbug86

and would that be the case of having randomers in the background of a posed shot of some people, then you putting it online?

Thirdfox

I think it has to be specific... e.g. a picture of one stranger in focus.

But does anyone know of a statue/article etc. that covers this?

Sangre

besty wrote:

I think you need permission from the person in the photos if you are going to republish/broadcast it.

What about celebrities then?

Thirdfox

Doesn't that fall under "duty to report"?

Sangre

But surely a celebrity lifestyle is only a duty to report because the papers made it a duty to report?

Thirdfox

But the papers will only publish something that their readers want to know about... e.g. Hello magazine and Victoria Beckham - if no-one wanted to know about her life then they wouldn't have a duty to report and would not report it in the first place due to economic sense...

Victor

Sangre wrote:

But surely a celebrity lifestyle is only a duty to report because the papers made it a duty to report?

That needs to be balanced with the copyright (?) that the celebrity has on their own image, especially if they area photo model.

dermot_sheehan

Victor wrote:

That needs to be balanced with the copyright (?) that the celebrity has on their own image, especially if they area photo model.

Copyright subsits with the photographer as he operated the device which created the "art work".

As far as I know there are no restrictions on photography in a public area (presuming you don't create a nuisance and obstruct the road).

If you however take a photo of a famous person and use that to endorse a product, they can sue for defamation (case with golfer whose image was used to sell chocolate), the idea being they can claim endorsing your product lowers them in the eyes, etc etc.

In some jurisdictions, California I believe, celebrities have a property right in their image, to the best of my knowledge this is not the case in ireland.

Dave!

This forum is turning out better than I thought tis very interesting, even for laymen like myself

Thirdfox

Beauty of law is that there is no requirement to have knowledge of the law to give opinions on the moral/ethical stance the law takes...

hullaballoo

I'd be very interested in discussion of legal issues from a non-legal standpoint. I think that there are issues that the law handles that should be bandied about in a public forum (such as this). I'm looking forward to the next time a case is decided that generates interest from a public point of view.

In fact, now that I think about it, shouldn't the Gary Glitter thread be in this forum?