Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,489   Posts: 1,542,933   Online: 867
      
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678
Results 71 to 72 of 72
  1. #71

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by blansky
    This line in the article interested me:

    Also cited was a 1982 ruling in which the New York Court of Appeals sided with The New York Times in a suit brought by Clarence Arrington, whose photograph, taken without his knowledge while he was walking in the Wall Street area, appeared on the cover of The New York Times Magazine in 1978 to illustrate an article titled "The Black Middle Class: Making It." Mr. Arrington said the picture was published without his consent to represent a story he didn't agree with.

    While I agree whole heartedly with the supreme court ruling, this above reference was sort of troubling. Because street photography is sort of neutral on issues, and is more of a slice of life portrayal. The above example shows what could happen when a photograph is used as an illustration and this benign aspect may disappear.

    Using your image to illustrate a point of view that you may not share and could damage your livelyhood or reputation is not a victimless random sampling of street "life".

    On top of that using your likeness as illustration, is heading into commerce and away from the "art" that street photography was defined to embrace.
    you can find the judges decision online and need to read it - not a very long one. If I can get it right, she took a well developed area of 1st amendment rights - freedom of the press in relation to privacy and then extrapolated - something already done in previous decisions - to the area of 1st Amendment rights in questions - Freedom of Speech (expression). The Arrington case is one of the strongest cases in the former area - freedom of the press. The judge used that as a building block - following some existing precedent - for her decision on freedom of speech vs. privacy in this particualr case

    so in that particular case - Arrington - it's deciding - among other things - whether it's journalism heading into commerce (it was the cover), as well as privacy issues. The courts found in favour of the 1st amendment rights of the press.

    actually - here's the decision - found it again

    http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3ds...2006_50171.htm

  2. #72

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by blansky
    Using your image to illustrate a point of view that you may not share and could damage your livelyhood or reputation is not a victimless random sampling of street "life".

    On top of that using your likeness as illustration, is heading into commerce and away from the "art" that street photography was defined to embrace.
    and of course as a photojournalist or editorial photogrpaher, the above happens every day...

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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