Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,276   Posts: 1,534,705   Online: 928
      
Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 378910111213141516 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 152
  1. #121
    Poisson Du Jour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SE Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,541
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by moose10101 View Post
    When the thread title is "Upset at the actions of the photo lab", the photo lab's obligations under the law have everything to do with the discussion. Your opinion about the law doesn't absolve the photo lab of any responsibilities they may have under Australian law.

    Telling it like it really is.
    .::Gary Rowan Higgins

    A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.
    —Anon.






  2. #122
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Okay, so that's the law guys! Nothing to discuss here!
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  3. #123
    Worker 11811's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,620
    Quote Originally Posted by moose10101 View Post
    When the thread title is "Upset at the actions of the photo lab", the photo lab's obligations under the law have everything to do with the discussion. Your opinion about the law doesn't absolve the photo lab of any responsibilities they may have under Australian law.
    Yes, but read that law and I think you'll agree that a simple bare bum in a photo does not constitute child abuse.

    In this case, according to the description of the photo which we were given and interpreting the summary of the law which we were shown, I think it's pretty clear that the photo lab AND the police applied that law incorrectly.

    Incorrect, negligent and/or discriminatory application of a law against one person for arbitrary reasons is a redressable offense.

    Yes, this is Australian law but I'll say it again. It doesn't matter if you're in Adelaide or Albuquerque. You can't just make up laws and you can't decide when to apply them. You have to go by what is written.

    According to what I read, the laws in question were interpreted incorrectly, applied incorrectly and, in my opinion, they were applied NEGLIGENTLY.
    Randy S.

    In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni.

    -----

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/randystankey/

  4. #124
    Stephen Frizza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,380
    Images
    174
    As a photo lab owner in Australia and someone who has been a printer in various other labs over 15 years I believe to the core the way this photo lab acted is a disgrace that shows a shocking lack of judgement. If I as a client were subjected to such an event I would be on the phone to legal representation and suing both the individual and the lab for defamation of character. If you flip though many photo albums your guaranteed to find nudie shots parents have innocently made of their children without a single thought of any sexual aspects. They are simply moments of life documentation. Should my parents have been notified to the police when the lab person printed this image of me?
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	babyfrizza.jpg 
Views:	48 
Size:	349.1 KB 
ID:	70692

    I feel embarrassed a lab in Australia behaved the way it did.
    Last edited by Stephen Frizza; 06-24-2013 at 07:58 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    "Its my profession to hijack time" ~ Stephen Frizza.

  5. #125

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,241
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by Worker 11811 View Post
    Yes, but read that law and I think you'll agree that a simple bare bum in a photo does not constitute child abuse.

    In this case, according to the description of the photo which we were given and interpreting the summary of the law which we were shown, I think it's pretty clear that the photo lab AND the police applied that law incorrectly.

    Incorrect, negligent and/or discriminatory application of a law against one person for arbitrary reasons is a redressable offense.

    Yes, this is Australian law but I'll say it again. It doesn't matter if you're in Adelaide or Albuquerque. You can't just make up laws and you can't decide when to apply them. You have to go by what is written.

    According to what I read, the laws in question were interpreted incorrectly, applied incorrectly and, in my opinion, they were applied NEGLIGENTLY.
    I would re-read the initial description, to me it sounds like the kid was bent over and spread, and all of his bits could be seen, which would technically violate something. Either way honestly I think the OP was foolish to think this WOULDN'T happen, but I still think it sucks that it did.


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

  6. #126

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,122
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    1
    ...
    Last edited by jnanian; 06-24-2013 at 08:56 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: and i lacked common sense

  7. #127

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen Frizza View Post
    As a photo lab owner in Australia and someone who has been a printer in various other labs over 15 years I believe to the core the way this photo lab acted is a disgrace that shows a shocking lack of judgement. If I as a client were subjected to such an event I would be on the phone to legal representation and suing both the individual and the lab for defamation of character. If you flip though many photo albums your guaranteed to find nudie shots parents have innocently made of their children without a single thought of any sexual aspects. They are simply moments of life documentation. Should my parents have been notified to the police when the lab person printed this image of me?
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	babyfrizza.jpg 
Views:	48 
Size:	349.1 KB 
ID:	70692

    I feel embarrassed a lab in Australia behaved the way it did.
    Thanks Stephen, for summing up my exact feelings.

    If my Jobo E6 processing doesn't work out you may get some new business

  8. #128

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,028
    Awww... what a cute baby!

  9. #129
    winger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Page County, IA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,405
    Images
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by Lowly View Post
    Thanks Stephen, for summing up my exact feelings.

    If my Jobo E6 processing doesn't work out you may get some new business
    I was going to suggest you look him up since your stuff was getting sent out anyway. I just figured it would get lost in the rest of the discussion.

    And, for the record, I think the lab's judgement was very questionable and the police decision to destroy the slide was actionable. If it was not evidence of a crime, then it should have been returned. If it was evidence of a crime, then it should have been logged as evidence. There's no allowance in the law for items to be destroyed without due process. And this wasn't. My two cents.

  10. #130

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    607
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Worker 11811 View Post
    Yes, but read that law and I think you'll agree that a simple bare bum in a photo does not constitute child abuse.

    In this case, according to the description of the photo which we were given and interpreting the summary of the law which we were shown, I think it's pretty clear that the photo lab AND the police applied that law incorrectly.

    Incorrect, negligent and/or discriminatory application of a law against one person for arbitrary reasons is a redressable offense.

    Yes, this is Australian law but I'll say it again. It doesn't matter if you're in Adelaide or Albuquerque. You can't just make up laws and you can't decide when to apply them. You have to go by what is written.

    According to what I read, the laws in question were interpreted incorrectly, applied incorrectly and, in my opinion, they were applied NEGLIGENTLY.
    If you're going to argue that the law was applied incorrectly, then you must also disagree with the post I replied to, which claimed that this discussion was solely about the rationale behind the law, and its application in this case didn't matter.

    Also, the photo lab doesn't apply the law; their responsibility is to obey the law. As far as I know, calling the police to report what you believe may be a crime isn't a redressable offense if you're wrong. The police, OTOH, have no excuse.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin