can you take someones picture in public if they yell, "NO!" ?

[lol101]

French can be too emotional at times , maybe it's just the wine they like to consume by gallons
--
Berghof G.C.

Sir, I respectfully take offence with your assertion!

We don't "consume wine by gallons", we drink wine by hectolitres !!!

Keep your bizarre units away from our cherrished "pinard"!

This had to be said. I feel better already.

... and no! We're not too emotional as I just proved...

;-)

--
http://lol-photoblog.blogspot.com/

 

[awphoto]

You certainly seemed bothered about where I was from when you made the snide comment about someone in England commenting on French law!

And that was without knowing anything about me or where I conduct my business I may add.

"your understanding". Fine you understand what you want. I will go by the law. Be that French, English or whatever. More likely to get it correct that way.

As the saying goes mate. "opinions are like arseholes, we all have one".

Yes, I am from Ontario Canada and the photograph laws in Quebec are different from every other place in Canada.

Where you come from makes no difference to me and you are certainly welcome to make a comment or offer an opinion on whatever you want. I trust you will allow me the same privilege.

My understanding is .... the subject owns their own image until they sign it away in France and Quebec, Canada regardless of who has the image in their possession.

I have looked this up many times in the past and satisfied myself that this is the correct info. I did not use other peoples opinions. I offered this info to the OP and aside from his bad manners he refused this advice.

As to France. Probably 60% of my work recently has been in France so I do have a rough idea what goes on there.

I note you have changed from "you cannot take a picture" to "you cannot use that photo" though.

Also "controls the photo" is different from owning the photo.

hopefully I did not say you cant take a photo, but I certainly meant to say that you cannot use that photo for any purpose unless the subject signs off for a specific purpose. In essence , the subject controls the photo.

I see you are from London England and you are giving an opinion on French law ???

It seems photographing any person or people in Paris is illegal until consent is obtained !!

--

If you go into Home Depot and someone offers to help you and he is not an employee, you are in Canada

Wrong.

It is NOT illegal to just take the picture and the picture does NOT belong to the subject.

There is no such law in France.

--

If you go into Home Depot and someone offers to help you and he is not an employee, you are in Canada

--

If you go into Home Depot and someone offers to help you and he is not an employee, you are in Canada

 

[MusicDoctorDJ]

As the saying goes mate. "opinions are like arseholes, we all have one".

That may be . . . but opinions doesn't really make anyone right.

I just find it amazing how so many who buy cameras suddenly become jerks!

Of course . . . maybe the camera has nothing to do with that . . .

--
J. D.
Colorado

 

[mamallama]

Move on. Anyone can sneak a picture in public places. Most have no value. There's no need to be rude about it.

--mamallama

 

[G. Gray]

well, your option. I did not offer my opinion, only facts.If you refuse my help, that is your loss.

I am not taking your advice G.Gray because you are not the only opinion that matters even though you think so.

--

If you go into Home Depot and someone offers to help you and he is not an employee, you are in Canada

 

[awphoto]

Errrrr. that is why it is an opinion and not a fact.

You are right about cameras and jerks though.

As the saying goes mate. "opinions are like arseholes, we all have one".

That may be . . . but opinions doesn't really make anyone right.

I just find it amazing how so many who buy cameras suddenly become jerks!

Of course . . . maybe the camera has nothing to do with that . . .

--
J. D.
Colorado

 

[awphoto]

Nope. You did NOT offer facts.

You offered opinion which was not backed up with any facts despite being asked for your sources.

well, your option. I did not offer my opinion, only facts.If you refuse my help, that is your loss.

I am not taking your advice G.Gray because you are not the only opinion that matters even though you think so.

--

If you go into Home Depot and someone offers to help you and he is not an employee, you are in Canada

 

[Aristoc]

YOu should see the picture without the face blurred. It's a keeper!

Move on. Anyone can sneak a picture in public places. Most have no value. There's no need to be rude about it.

--mamallama

 

[Jon Allison]

YOu should see the picture without the face blurred. It's a keeper!

Why? Who is it? Lord Lucan? Jimmy Hoffa? Elvis?

 

[G. Gray]

As the saying goes mate. "opinions are like arseholes, we all have one.
In your case you appear to have two.

You certainly seemed bothered about where I was from when you made the snide comment about someone in England commenting on French law!

And that was without knowing anything about me or where I conduct my business I may add.

"your understanding". Fine you understand what you want. I will go by the law. Be that French, English or whatever. More likely to get it correct that way.

As the saying goes mate. "opinions are like arseholes, we all have one".

Yes, I am from Ontario Canada and the photograph laws in Quebec are different from every other place in Canada.

Where you come from makes no difference to me and you are certainly welcome to make a comment or offer an opinion on whatever you want. I trust you will allow me the same privilege.

My understanding is .... the subject owns their own image until they sign it away in France and Quebec, Canada regardless of who has the image in their possession.

I have looked this up many times in the past and satisfied myself that this is the correct info. I did not use other peoples opinions. I offered this info to the OP and aside from his bad manners he refused this advice.

As to France. Probably 60% of my work recently has been in France so I do have a rough idea what goes on there.

I note you have changed from "you cannot take a picture" to "you cannot use that photo" though.

Also "controls the photo" is different from owning the photo.

hopefully I did not say you cant take a photo, but I certainly meant to say that you cannot use that photo for any purpose unless the subject signs off for a specific purpose. In essence , the subject controls the photo.

I see you are from London England and you are giving an opinion on French law ???

It seems photographing any person or people in Paris is illegal until consent is obtained !!

--

If you go into Home Depot and someone offers to help you and he is not an employee, you are in Canada

Wrong.

It is NOT illegal to just take the picture and the picture does NOT belong to the subject.

There is no such law in France.

--

If you go into Home Depot and someone offers to help you and he is not an employee, you are in Canada

--

If you go into Home Depot and someone offers to help you and he is not an employee, you are in Canada

--

If you go into Home Depot and someone offers to help you and he is not an employee, you are in Canada

 

[mamallama]

YOu should see the picture without the face blurred. It's a keeper!

Different strokes for different folks. No face will make that picture worthwhile for me.

--mamallama

 

[Patco]

French can be too emotional at times , maybe it's just the wine they like to consume by gallons
--
Berghof G.C.

Sir, I respectfully take offence with your assertion!

We don't "consume wine by gallons", we drink wine by hectolitres !!!

Keep your bizarre units away from our cherrished "pinard"!

This had to be said. I feel better already.

... and no! We're not too emotional as I just proved...

;-)

I'll drink a nice merlot to that! (but then I'll drink to just about anything ;-))
A hectolitre should last me about a year, if I sip slowly.

--
Patco
A photograph is more than a bunch of pixels

 

[Aristoc]

you should start a different thread because this is not what this thread is about.

YOu should see the picture without the face blurred. It's a keeper!

Different strokes for different folks. No face will make that picture worthwhile for me.

--mamallama

 

[awphoto]

Oh dear, having to resort to cheap and ignorant insults now are you.

Time to say goodnight Gracie.

 

[Diopter]

I'll drink a nice merlot to that! (but then I'll drink to just about anything ;-))
A hectolitre should last me about a year, if I sip slowly.

The fact is that the French street photography is not as visible as Russian or British.

:-(

 

[7DVancouverite]

Wow!

Almost 100 messages in a thread over an awful image that should have been deleted as soon as the subject objected!

There would be no commercial viability for this image. Furthermore, common sense and decorum would dictate to most of us, that if the intended subject objects to their image being taken, then we should respect that, and immediately delete it.

Can we stop the 3rd Grade playground antics now....this should never have been a legal discussion as the morality of the situation should have made the original question completely moot.

--
Whatta Hobby this Photography stuff is! Expensive!

 

[G. Gray]

Oh dear, having to resort to cheap and ignorant insults now are you.

Time to say goodnight Gracie.

--

If you go into Home Depot and someone offers to help you and he is not an employee, you are in Canada

 

[G. Gray]

Wow!

Almost 100 messages in a thread over an awful image that should have been deleted as soon as the subject objected!

There would be no commercial viability for this image. Furthermore, common sense and decorum would dictate to most of us, that if the intended subject objects to their image being taken, then we should respect that, and immediately delete it.

Can we stop the 3rd Grade playground antics now....this should never have been a legal discussion as the morality of the situation should have made the original question completely moot.

--
Whatta Hobby this Photography stuff is! Expensive!

--

If you go into Home Depot and someone offers to help you and he is not an employee, you are in Canada

 

[Ilkka Nissilä]

But, they may not believe you either.
Gerry

Huh? Margouillat and you said entirely different things, yet you claim to agree with him.

You said "FRENCH law states that a person owns their own photographic image and cannot be used for any purpose unless a signed agreement is used. If the person can be identified in the photo that person has the right to go after you for monetory compensation. Even if the person is not the primary subject of the photo."

Right to one's image is not the same as copyright. The person in the picture, if they actually had the copyright, would be able to use the image freely at their will, without the photographers' consent. This is clearly not the case.

Margouillat said "> > However, when capturing the image of a person has been accomplished in full sight of the person without this person opposing to that capture, while the person was able to do so (in full knowledge), the consent of the person is presumed."

so consent is implied if the photographer is in plain view and there is no objection at that time, and therefore no signed agreement is needed.

As for your claim about "cannot be used for any purpose" ... this again is not true. You can take the picture and make prints for it for yourself for example. You can publish it if the person did not object while you were in plain view and obviously taking the picture and if the picture is not defamatory or in some way harmful to the subject and if it's not for commercial purpose.

 

[Aristoc]

You don't know if there are plenty of more images from different angles and that it was only once this last shot was taken that the lady made a face. You are only seeing one photo.

Of course, everyone should listen to a vancouverites personal opinions.

Vancouverite --> the comments and suggestions on the thread can be used for any photograph. Just for your information.