"Marcus Fox" wrote in
message news:NYmdnVm_IM_8vr7VnZ2dnUVZ8vCdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> I'm referring to English Law.
>
> I'm aware that the current laws on photography permit anyone to photograph
> anything as long as it's in a public place (subject to the exclusions on
> photos of children at the beach and security installations.
No law saying you cannot photograph children (or anyone else for that
matter) on a public beach. Society tends to feel uncomfortable about
children being photographed in that situation so most photographers tend to
steer clear.
> What is the case as regards photography in places where the public are
> generally permitted, but may or may not have to pay entry, or have the
> owners refuse to admit them for any reason. Assume that photography is not
> expressly prohibited, what is the situation should someone end up being in
> your photo but object to having their picture taken? Places like
> supermarkets, hotels, swimming pools, museums, down at your local pub, etc
>
These places are "private property" and not public places. You may be
invited inside but you abide by their rules. If they say no photos then you
should abide by that ruling.
> What is the situation regarding "model releases"? I understand that they
> are
> required for commercial photography, but aren't newspaper photos
> considered
> as such? I'm sure Fred West (and other infamous individuals) didn't have
> to
> sign permission before the Sun could publish his "perp. walk".
You can photograph anyone in a public place as long as their photo is not
used for commercial purposes. If you wish to use that persons image for
commercial purposes (i.e. to promote or advertise) then a model release form
is required.
MC
|