Wayne Harridge wrote:
>
> Tom wrote:
>
> > While I see your point, I'm not sure I completely agree with you.
> > It truly
> > is a sad world, though, isn't it.
>
> Sure is !
>
> Pretty soon you won't be able to publish any image which is recognisable as
> a person, something belonging to a person or any landscape. Every image
> will have to be purely abstract.
>
> What if I post a photo of our family dog on the internet, I get divorced and
> my ex-wife "owns" the dog after the settlement. She'll probably sue me for
> damages !
>
I avoid taking pictures of people for just these reasons. The last time
I did street shooting was on New Year's eve 2000. Everytime there was a
single person as the subject, I asked permission. For groups and crowds,
I didn't bother. I didn't take any pictures of children by themselves. I
suppose this is why I mostly take pictures of buildings and cemetaries.
Most buildings don't need a release, and I don't think any cemetaries
require one. I suppose someone's estate could sue me, you never know.
--
"I have a dragon and I'm not afraid to use it!"
Dirk Wright
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|