Right to publish video of me?

source

Hi all,

I've just had a very "interesting interaction" with no campaigners from the Irish society for christian civilisation in Limerick.

The campaigner stopped me in the street and tried to hand me a flyer, I asked him why he believed in a no vote and he told me to read the flyer. I then advised him that i would be voting yes as the only reason I can see for a no vote is due to religion and that the basis for a no vote in relation to this was flawed.

I then noticed someone standing quite close to me, and when I turned around another member of his group was filming me. I was not made aware they were filming me and when I saw that they were, I advised him that I did not give my permission to use my image as part of their campaign.

Now my understanding is that while it was in a public place and they have the right to film me, 1 they cannot film my discussion with a person on the street without my prior knowledge and 2, They cannot use my image to promote their cause or for financial gain.

There was also a very minor breach of the Public Order Act on their part, ie one of their group called me ridiculous (Section 6 at a stretch), I have no intention of following this up as to do so would be petty.

In relation to the filming is my understanding of this correct? If so I intend writing a very strongly worded email to this organisation in relation to this as while I'm not ashamed of my views on this topic in any way I am quite a private individual and do not wish to have my image used by an organisation like this.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Pat Mustard

source wrote: »

There was also a very minor breach of the Public Order Act on their part, ie one of their group called me ridiculous (Section 6 at a stretch), I have no intention of following this up as to do so would be petty.

Not even at a stretch, I would think.

S.6 of the Public Order Act requires intention or recklessness as to whether a breach of the peace is occasioned. According to A.G. v Daniel Cunningham [1932] 1 IR 28, breach of the peace can be defined as something which is likely to cause reasonable alarm and apprehension to members of the public.

I don't think that calling somebody ridiculous is likely to cause reasonable alarm and apprehension to members of the public, under ordinary circumstances. Perhaps I am missing something but I don't see how that arises in the given circumstances, either.

Therefore, I don't see how it could be argued that there could be sufficient intention or recklessness. Without the requisite Mens Rea I don't see how a charge under s.6 of the Public Order Act could stand.

goz83

You were in a public place and so can be filmed. The conversation could not be considered a private one in such a place. The word "ridiculous" seems to have been used in response to your utterings and blanket statements of a "no vote" being a religious vote, as opposed to it being used in malice.

gctest50

source wrote: »

Hi all,

I've just had a very "interesting interaction" with no campaigners from the Irish society for christian civilisation in Limerick.
........

you'd think he'd move here if he's so interested in the goings on here

http://www.solocheck.ie/Irish-Director/Folley/Paul/609236477/

Paul Folley Langbank Farmhouse Dowan Road Milngavie G62 6EL

(may be useful to the OP )

TheQuietFella

If I'm not mistaken they can't use or broadcast this film without your consent. I was filmed last year by the national broadcaster for a TV prog' where they asked me some questions and after they asked me to sign a release if they decided to use the footage which thankfully they didn't.