This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.

New EU Rules Take Effect Today

Discussion in 'Forum News/Forum Support' started by robert, May 25, 2018.

  1. AnthonyM

    AnthonyM Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Messages:
    1,496
    Likes Received:
    728
    Location:
    London, UK

    -Return to Top-

    Apart from some very limited restrictions, your general statement about publishing photos of people in the UK without consent is wrong, and it is important that photographers are not misled about what they can and cannot do.

    Whether it is unethical to publish such photos is a matter for each individual to decide.
     
    mmcguire, Keith Towers and daggy like this.
  2. AdrianG

    AdrianG Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,660
    Likes Received:
    1,325
    Location:
    CH, UK, GHA

    -Return to Top-

    I didn’t make a statement other than saying it wasn’t straightforward. First of all, different law applies in different parts of the UK. But I t’s true that there are few restrictions anywhere in the UK. However, since the European Human Rights Act was incorporated in British law in 1998 the right of privacy is provided and numerous privacy cases have been brought to court. Since there’s no definition of privacy in British law, one never knows how it will turn out. As I said, not straightforward.

    No, it clearly is not. There must be rules in a world where everyone can publish everything worldwide. Mate, a few photographs can ruin a person‘s life. It’s not about ethics, it’s about protecting the vulnerable and the defenseless. The people in the photographs are exposed while the photographer, enjoying the comfort of anonymity, talks about ethics, freedom and democracy. One person‘s freedom ends where another‘s begins.
     
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2018
  3. Dan Hillier

    Dan Hillier Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2013
    Messages:
    1,478
    Likes Received:
    644
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia

    -Return to Top-

    Even here in Australia, despite the presumption of no right to privacy in public places, we still have defamation laws that could apply in some cases.

    However, it is good to know that taking a photo of my family at a public event isn't going to lead to problems if I also have strangers included in the shot. Also, the good thing about defamation actions is that they are civil suits that weigh up the facts of a unique case. It's not like the government is telling people what they can and can't photograph and how photographers are required to act in public. I'm surprised that people have handed over that level of control to a government.
     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2018
  4. AnthonyM

    AnthonyM Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Messages:
    1,496
    Likes Received:
    728
    Location:
    London, UK

    -Return to Top-

    Your original statement was "Publishing images of people without their prior written permission was and is in most cases a violation of people’s rights in their image" and that is wrong in law.

    There are no world-wide rules on what can be published, and there never will be. This is because different cultures have different views on the ethics of free speech v privacy. Your views are held by many, but also rejected by many. There will never be unanimity amongst reasonable people on this.
     
    mmcguire likes this.
  5. AdrianG

    AdrianG Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,660
    Likes Received:
    1,325
    Location:
    CH, UK, GHA

    -Return to Top-

    There are very few restrictions in Europe on what you can and can’t photograph and I am sure they apply in Australia, too. There are restrictions on what you can publish without consent of the people in your photograph, however in the particular case you mention of photographing your family at a public event, these rules do not apply, even if there are strangers in the shot. If you fancy random shots of random people in random places in Europe you can do that for your own pleasure, for slide shows, lectures and so on without any restrictions. You can publish just about anything in a book, magazine or the internet, too, but in this case you have to ask your subjects for permission or make sure they are unrecognizable.

    It’s not about handing control over to the government. In fact, the government is not involved at all. The only parties involved are the photographer and the subject, and the civil courts to settle the matter if called upon by either side. This is just a side effect of the majority of europeans valuing privacy over some other interests. None of this is new or has changed recently.

    While the new EU data protection regulations finally force internet platforms to comply with above mentioned, 20 years old (and in many cases much older) law and thereby may have some marginal effects on some photographers, its key intention is a completely different one. It is a first step on the way to hand over the power over the kind, amount and use of data collected to each individual, to cut back the power of large internet companies and finally to inhibit the thus far unrestricted ability of erratic and unpredictable foreign powers, such as Russia or the USA, to install hostile regimes of surveillance, control and manipulation of Orwellian dimensions within Europe. We need new laws to meet this challenge, which give our authorities means to fight back without turning our own services loose. We want to keep our services at a very short leach, under complete parliamentary control and within legal and constitutional boundaries. We must therefore shape our digital landscape to provide for both individual freedom of participation, expression and information AND control of manipulation attempts on the level of search engine results etc. under the surveillance of technocrats rather than security people. Europeans currently enjoy the highest level of political freedom and participation in the world, but we are fighting many defensive battles in many theatres and this is among the arsenal we field.
     
    Dan Hillier likes this.
  6. Keith Towers

    Keith Towers Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2012
    Messages:
    3,472
    Likes Received:
    1,327
    Location:
    Isle of Wight, United Kingdom

    -Return to Top-

    As things stand at the moment you are right. As long as the images are used for editorial purposes a photographer is within his/her rights to publish those images without question. As you have said, the morality of doing so depend totally on the photographer and what they consider to be morally acceptable. This is what I feel the new rules are trying to address and curtail. I truly hope I am wrong and I will be glad, in this instance, to be totally wrong about them and that my interpretation is no more than paranoia. :)
     
  7. AdrianG

    AdrianG Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,660
    Likes Received:
    1,325
    Location:
    CH, UK, GHA

    -Return to Top-

    The right of privacy is part of art. 8.1 of the 1998 European Human Rights Act. I assumed it was obvious enough that we’re talking about Europe, not the world. The EHRA was incorporated in UK law in 1998. There have been several landmark cases of privacy suits in the UK since, mostly celeb vs newspaper, most of which went in favour of the suitors. The development of common law will continue in this direction anyway, regardless of brexit and data protection.
     
  8. AdrianG

    AdrianG Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,660
    Likes Received:
    1,325
    Location:
    CH, UK, GHA

    -Return to Top-

    No, that’s what the Human Rights Act addresses. The new regulations consider a photograph of a person to be data of said person. Since these same regulations give every person the power to decide which data may be collected and what this data may be used for, the net result is of course the same.
     
  9. Dirk Offringa

    Dirk Offringa Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2013
    Messages:
    1,249
    Likes Received:
    818
    Location:
    France

    -Return to Top-

    I totally agree with this. That pretty much sums it all up. Maybe this regulation is a good opportunity to sit down and think about what we're doing and how we sometimes use other people's essence for our own interest. What people ARE, belongs to them. And as soon as we publish, exhibit or otherwise seek to collect credit using their being, that must be done AT LEAST with their consent. This is hard to admit, and I sure have some images I'm really proud of that I would love to publish or exhibit, but I never did.

    But in the country I live and work in, GDPR doesn't change much to the already existing laws as far as I'm concerned. I have read a huge lot of bullshit articles on the subject, but I have yet to see an indeep article by a real specialist lawyer. These will certainly come in a near future, but need time to be written because law is complicated and we probably need a first trial (even provoked to speed things up) to establish jurisprudence. I don't believe a word of what's written in all those papers published the day after, by self-proclaimed specialists without a degree in law. Don't forget that this is also a business opportunity for many of those "specialists", and to grow that market they need people to fear the regulation.
     
  10. Dirk Offringa

    Dirk Offringa Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2013
    Messages:
    1,249
    Likes Received:
    818
    Location:
    France

    -Return to Top-

    I believe that we can expect a clarification soon about to which extent photographers as artists are concerned and to which extent the GPRD overrules existing copyright laws. I'm quite sure, for instance, that a photographer cannot be forced to give access to his corpus of work to anyone to inspect and delete "data" on which they appear. But these are only suppositions driven by common sense that need to be confirmed.
     
  11. Dirk Offringa

    Dirk Offringa Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2013
    Messages:
    1,249
    Likes Received:
    818
    Location:
    France

    -Return to Top-

    I believe that we can expect a clarification soon about to which extent photographers as artists are concerned and to which extent the GPRD overrules existing copyright laws. I'm quite sure, for instance, that a photographer cannot be forced to give access to his corpus of work to anyone to inspect and delete "data" on which they appear. But these are only suppositions driven by common sense that need to be confirmed.
     
  12. AdrianG

    AdrianG Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,660
    Likes Received:
    1,325
    Location:
    CH, UK, GHA

    -Return to Top-

    This is neither desirable nor practicable nor intended. Just like you can have a list of contacts in your phone without having to ask anyone, you can have a collection of photographs for your own pleasure including prints on your walls without anyone’s permission, as long as you don’t make this data available to third parties or the general public. Thus far, however, huge amounts of data have been retrieved from people’s phones by countless companies, mostly without consent or knowledge of the owners, and passed on to yet more companies and organisations and that’s hopefully going to be a bit more difficult. Obviously all the crazies with almost unlimited funds at their disposal, like the IS or NSA, can still do with your phone what ever they want but they have to do it and can’t just graze your phone‘s content off the internet.
     
    Dirk Offringa likes this.
  13. AnthonyM

    AnthonyM Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Messages:
    1,496
    Likes Received:
    728
    Location:
    London, UK

    -Return to Top-

    The GDPR contains provisions which require Member States to pass laws which "reconcile the right to the protection of personal data pursuant to this Regulation with the right to freedom of expression and information, including processing for journalistic purposes and the purposes of academic, artistic or literary expression."

    The UK has granted significant exemptions which implement this requirement to reconcile. For example, where data is processed for the purposes of artistic expression, there is no requirement to provide information to the person involved, which matches your common sense supposition.

    It is for each Member State to decide how to implement this requirement. France, where you are based, may have done so in a different manner.
     
    daggy and Dirk Offringa like this.
  14. Jmcg

    Jmcg New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2018
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0

    -Return to Top-

    Trying to set up today’s loggin with no success....help
     
  15. robert

    robert Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2011
    Messages:
    15,848
    Likes Received:
    5,375
    Location:
    Austin

    -Return to Top-

    You're logged in, otherwise you couldn't post. If you're having other difficulties, post a new thread
     

Share This Page

  1. fujix-forum.com uses cookies to help personalize content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice