Twist on the right to take photographs in public
Aug 21, 2017 09:26:09 #
AzPicLady wrote:
I show my work at art fairs and shows. If someone... (show quote)
When you say "steal" your work what exactly do you think that they are going to do? What is their plan...exactly?
Aug 21, 2017 09:43:59 #
cactuspic
Loc: Dallas, TX
It may not be illegal to take the picture; but it may be a violation of copyright law to display it, post it, publish it, or sell it.
Aug 21, 2017 09:44:37 #
cactuspic wrote:
It may not be illegal to take the picture; but it may be a violation of copyright law to display it, post it, publish it, or sell it.
It isn't.
Aug 21, 2017 09:51:03 #
Aug 21, 2017 09:55:44 #
If instead of an art fair it was a photography display in a public park, I'm sure the participating photographers would get very upset if someone wandered around snapping pictures of their beautiful prints and ignoring the signs saying "No Photographs". Legal or not, it's not fair. I think we should respect the artists' wishes.
Aug 21, 2017 09:56:16 #
usnpilot wrote:
Prove your statement.
I stand corrected. It is if you get caught taking the photo and the artist wants to pursue it.
Aug 21, 2017 09:57:59 #
rpavich wrote:
Again, I disagree that just because someone doesn't want you to do anything that doing it automatically means you are rude.
Example. I'm now requesting that you never post here on the 'hog again and if you do, you are automatically rude.
Does that follow?
Example. I'm now requesting that you never post here on the 'hog again and if you do, you are automatically rude.
Does that follow?
No, because not posting affects me but has very little effect on you.
A better example would be if you asked people to stop saying nasty things about you it would be rude of them to not stop.
Aug 21, 2017 09:59:26 #
lesdmd wrote:
No, because not posting affects me but has very little effect on you.
A better example would be if you asked people to stop saying nasty things about you it would be rude of them to not stop.
A better example would be if you asked people to stop saying nasty things about you it would be rude of them to not stop.
So you arbitrarily make up another rule; that it has to have a "certain effect" on me otherwise you don't have to follow it.
Does anyone have any idea how to think rationally anymore?
Aug 21, 2017 10:07:52 #
AzPicLady wrote:
I show my work at art fairs and shows. If someone... (show quote)
That hardly follows. If someone photographs your work as the subject and in isolation, it might indicate an intent to copy it, but not necessarily. But if someone photographs an art show and your work simply appears in her photographs, she is not stealing your work. If your work appears in a public space, you certainly have the right to ask people to purchase it, but they do have the right to photograph it without your permission. If they then use that photograph commercially, you are entitled to compensation or even to prohibiting that use.
This is settled law in the US, perhaps not elsewhere.
I understand this is inconvenient for an artist--in fact, downright infuriating perhaps--but I have had this explanation from several attorneys and there was not a disagreement among them.
Aug 21, 2017 10:12:14 #
rpavich wrote:
It's not a crime to disobey a sign. If you aren't committing an actual crime, you won't get arrested. If someone has an event of private property and posts "no cameras allowed" the best they can do is ask you to leave. If you do you are good to go. If not, you will be guilty of a misdemeanor trespass.
If it's public property, sign or no sign, you aren't committing a crime.
If it's public property, sign or no sign, you aren't committing a crime.
See if you can find the post from two days ago about a UHH member in a park who was threatened by the police - to be arrested and have his picture in the newspaper - if he didn't surrender his SD card. Just because you didn't do anything wrong, that doesn't mean the police won't arrest you. They have a badge and a gun, so they do whatever they want. The admission of a mistake by the police department comes much later.
Aug 21, 2017 10:24:34 #
jerryc41 wrote:
See if you can find the post from two days ago about a UHH member in a park who was threatened by the police - to be arrested and have his picture in the newspaper - if he didn't surrender his SD card. Just because you didn't do anything wrong, that doesn't mean the police won't arrest you. They have a badge and a gun, so they do whatever they want. The admission of a mistake by the police department comes much later.
Yeah, you might beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride.
Aug 21, 2017 10:44:18 #
johnbee418
Loc: Manchester Conn.
I would be very interested to see an opinion posted here by a judge. I would bet all the above quotes
are not by lawyers or judges,
are not by lawyers or judges,
Aug 21, 2017 10:47:22 #
fetzler
Loc: North West PA
It would seem to that photographing art work would be OK provided the artwork is only part a scene that captures the ambiance of the day. If the photo is a copy of an artwork that might be used to make reproductions of the artwork then there would be a problem. If the photo is published then credit the artist.
Aug 21, 2017 10:47:34 #
repleo wrote:
I am sure the artist would be happy to sell you a copy if you find their work that inspiring.
That's the way it is supposed to work.
That's the way it is supposed to work.
Aug 21, 2017 10:53:54 #
I think some photography here is still protect-able. If you are taking pictures of the venue that happens to have a work within the frame that seems OK to me. However, a picture of just the work is different. It is sort of like a street photographer taking a picture that includes people vs a shoat where the person is obviously the subject.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.