Last Ten Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 do the police mind you taking photos? I usually ask for an ok to do so - news in the end, and the paper does the same thing. Those pics will probably end up in other news anyway (BBC, manxradio, etc), so no difference to them. Remember the car down marine drive a short while ago? That was frontpage on the examiner in the end - no real difference between people reading it on their site or here - news is news, and if it happens next to my house I'll try and catch it. Number plates are blanked out, obviously. I have raised this subject of taking images in public places with the Data Protection Office (due to my job and hobby) It is quite a complex subject but needless to say that you cannot (lawfully) publish pictures of peoples faces (which would make them recognisable) without their consent ! Car number plates should also be blanked out unless prior permission has been sought from the owner (nice one Amadeus) There is another twist in this as well in as much that Amadeus is potentially withinin a crime scene and any images could be subject to Police evidence etc. There is a whole can of worms to be opened with this subject and if anyone is interested I will send them a PDF file outlining photographers rights (well UK photographers rights). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
girl89 Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 I heard about this over the taxi radio on my way home last night, and saw the police car rushing towards the scene. Hope all passengers in the car are well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 do the police mind you taking photos? I usually ask for an ok to do so - news in the end, and the paper does the same thing. Those pics will probably end up in other news anyway (BBC, manxradio, etc), so no difference to them. Remember the car down marine drive a short while ago? That was frontpage on the examiner in the end - no real difference between people reading it on their site or here - news is news, and if it happens next to my house I'll try and catch it. Number plates are blanked out, obviously. I have raised this subject of taking images in public places with the Data Protection Office (due to my job and hobby) It is quite a complex subject but needless to say that you cannot (lawfully) publish pictures of peoples faces (which would make them recognisable) without their consent ! so WHO collects hundreds of consents from the spectators around the TT course?? NO ONE thats who. your mug can be on the front of ANY mag or paper without consent, unless you are saying we can all sue the papers for the fun of it as it's not lawfull?? i think it's probably more of a case that if you object, then they can't use it. and how many crooks mugs have we seen on CCTV footage on crimewatch?? i'm sure they didn't consent either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhumsaa Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 I was told by an international photographer that basically unless you are photographed on your own property you can't object to a photograph as the image isn't owned by you.... I've not seen any laws on the subject like LT tho Also in response to an earlier post I don't see why you can't question amadeus - he gave his response and I accept that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneak Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 How do manage to crash there anyway? Unless of course the person clipped the Kerb at speed.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 I was told by an international photographer that basically unless you are photographed on your own property you can't object to a photograph as the image isn't owned by you.... I've not seen any laws on the subject like LT tho You are basically right and LT is basically wrong. You can under some circumstances object to the use of an image - the rules depend upon the jurisdiction. In general terms you can potentially object if your likeness is used to promote a product commercially. In general terms you cannot object to the use of your likeness 'editorially' (ie news and current affairs). There are often national codes and rules which apply if children are involved. You may be able to object if you are somehow misrepresented. LT should get back to the DP people and let them know they are wrong - if that's what they said ! LT is certainly right that it's a complex subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%age Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 So let's wait until we get an in-depth report from MR or IOM Newspapers, and THEN we can speculate! Is manxforums any less capable of providing an in-depth report? If manxforums admin team so desired, then surely reports and any release of information from the police could be dissipated here. After all, manxforums is a bona fide information media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 definitely bona Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 After all, manxforums is a bona fide information media. But not necessarily a medium of bona fide information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 The diver might NOT be young/inexperienced. Its a Rover 200 so the driver is either over 80 and bought it because they liked it, or under 21 and bought it because its cheap to insure and you can rev the nuts out of the k-series engine. Did anyone check to see whether the road was littered with trilby hats and walking aides, or baseball caps and trainers? It could give a clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%age Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Well there is the problem. How can you have a serious information service where in the next sentence we are discussing the why, when, and wherefors of the rare occurences of white dog poo these days. Now, maybe if there was a 'serious' area for subscribers (. . . perhaps there is!), more people might want to subscribe to get the latest official news releases, which could cover any costs of the additional administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbms Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Crap excuse,your a voyeur,you dont know whether anyone is seriously injured.I find it very bizzare that you take pictures of crashes.Reminds me when I used to marshall at the TT,bad incidents would happen and there would be some ghoul taking snaps of it,all for moral purposes of course.... He takes thse pictures in the hope of selling via the press photography pool as far as I gather. therefore he is only doing his job albiet freelance and lets face it he takes decent pictures, so give him a break he is only trying to make a bit of an extra living and unlike yourself doesn't speculate or guess on causes and reasons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Well there is the problem. How can you have a serious information service where in the next sentence we are discussing the why, when, and wherefors of the rare occurences of white dog poo these days. Now, maybe if there was a 'serious' area for subscribers (. . . perhaps there is!), more people might want to subscribe to get the latest official news releases, which could cover any costs of the additional administration. But it is not and should not be a "news site" there are plenty of those and just because one person on the periphery of news-gathering uses it to hawk his wares doesn't mean it should change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%age Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 That said though, there's not a hack on the Island worth their salt that doesn't visit manxforums looking for some News. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 do the police mind you taking photos? I usually ask for an ok to do so - news in the end, and the paper does the same thing. I have raised this subject of taking images in public places with the Data Protection Office (due to my job and hobby) It is quite a complex subject but needless to say that you cannot (lawfully) publish pictures of peoples faces (which would make them recognisable) without their consent ! Car number plates should also be blanked out unless prior permission has been sought from the owner (nice one Amadeus) There is another twist in this as well in as much that Amadeus is potentially withinin a crime scene and any images could be subject to Police evidence etc. There is a whole can of worms to be opened with this subject and if anyone is interested I will send them a PDF file outlining photographers rights (well UK photographers rights). Is your PDF file, this one: http://www.sirimo.co.uk/media/UKPhotographersRights.pdf There is another (more up to date) similar article at http://www.urban75.org/photos/photographer...nd-the-law.html The key seems to be whether the subject would have a reasonable expectation of privacy - a statement that seems vague enough to keep a team of lawyers gainfully employed for some time. So if you are walking down Strand Street on a Saturday afternoon and a photographer takes your picture, then there is really nothing you can do about it. You are in a public place, so is the photographer, nuff said. Where there could be a problem is if say the picture of you was then used alongside an article about the amount of litter being dropped in Strand Street as it could "imply" that you are dropping litter/breaking the law. If the photo was used alongside an article about how busy Strand Street is on a Saturday afternoon then there is nothing harming you. If Amadaus had published a photo which clearly identified the person being carried into an Ambulance or put in the back of a Police Van, then that could be an invasion of that person's privacy. Publishing a photo of a car (with it's plates taken off) sitting at the side of the road (albeit on it's roof!), isn't illegal...... The Police can't stop people taking photos of a crime scene (unless they are obstructing a Police officer in the execution of their duty). Where the Police would be interested is if the photos that Amadeus took are ones that the Police were unable to. So if Amadeus had taken a photo of the crash happening, or the driver climbing out of the car etc, then the Police would probably like a copy of those as they are evidence. As per the photos above, the Police could of got one of their own photographers along and taken exactly the same photos as Amadeus has, so there is no problem with him taking these. Amadeus has said he usually asks the Police for permission anyway. I very much doubt they would try and stop him anyway. At accidents and crime scenes, there are normally photographers from the press turning up taking photos etc. If there is Police tape cordoning an area off, then being Press doesn't give them anymore rights than a member of the public and if they went under the cordon tape then offences could be bought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.