/ Copyright & Privacy
If a member of a group on a holiday, or expedition or walk takes videos with a DSLR (ie doesnt immediately looks like they are videoing rather just taking photos) of some of the group and puts it on YouTube I assume that is OK or do they have to get permission of those photographed first?
Then the interesting bit, if at the same time sound is recorded, so that conversations and comments of people near the photographer, but not necessarily being photographed, are recorded, and this is also on YouTube since the video has sound, do they have to give their permission? Particularly since they may not even know they are being recorded.
It feels odd because if someone wandered around with a tape recorder recording what people said and then put it on the web you would think they would have to ask permission first.
Anyhow are there any rules / law about this?
It only arose because of a video that someone posted that they apparently took during a trip I was on. There was nothing sensitive or rude said and no issue in this specific case, but it got me thinking about the general case with cameras no able to do full video and sound but still look like point and shoot.
If you feel uncomfortable with being recorded, you can speak up and ask that they stop or not record you. If they do not respect your wishes, also depending on the manner in which you are being photographed/recorded, it may then become harassment, which is an offence.
No permission is required to upload the captured footage, which is the property of the photographer. If the footage was taken under protest, or depending on how it's cut, then this upload could also constitute harassment.
All photographers I know would honour the wishes of anyone who speaks up and wishes to be excluded from being filmed/photographed, no questions asked.
I'm not sure if this differs if you are being filmed/photographed covertly (just google "Spy Camera"), but that it far more sinister and a lot more difficult to spot.
But the odd thing was recording sound which of course was picking up conversations of people that the camera was not pointing at so they would not know they were being recorded. That just feels different. Which is why I wondered whether the rules are different for recording sound? OK if you stand there with a large and obvious microphone, but maybe different if using a camera or phone which no one realise is recording what they are saying.
If you are in a public place, there's no reasonable expectation of privacy, so anyone can film or record anything without legal recourse. Even if they've been asked to stop filming and carry on doing so, they aren't committing an offence.
So, why are faces constantly blurred out on TV programmes nowadays?
I believe it ought to be illegal to blur out the face a scumbags filmed breaking the law (including antisocial behaviour).
A few more toe rags filmed and id'ed on TV would be a bonus.
We could even make it into s Satnight TV show! Scum of the Week!
> So, why are faces constantly blurred out on TV programmes nowadays?
> I believe it ought to be illegal to blur out the face a scumbags filmed breaking the law (including antisocial behaviour).
> A few more toe rags filmed and id'ed on TV would be a bonus.
> We could even make it into s Satnight TV show! Scum of the Week!
Faces could be blurred for a variety of reasons, but AFAIK, it's mostly to do with either avoiding prejudicing any ongoing investigations/legal proceedings with those involved in the footage or to stop people getting the hump about potentially being associated with someone being filmed if they are being accused of something serious etc. I've never blurred anyone's face out in the final edit, despite being tempted to for reasons of public decency after covering the Bulldog Bash one year.
I've been asked to stop filming and/or taking photos on numerous occasions, by the police or over-zealous private security who don't like you taking shots of their buildings, but I've always carried on doing what I was originally doing and ignored them after outlining my rights (having a 'rights card' to show them is most useful). I've also had members of the public take umbrage with me when I've been out taking shots for both work and personal use (fnar fnar...), but I really don't care; I'm within my rights to photograph them in public, and if they don't like it, they can either stay in their own homes or buy a burkha.
This is a good'un to watch about public/private spaces and the rights of the photographer/videographer (and Mr Hoffman is a true gent) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJH9F7Hcluo
Very interesting. Thanks for the update, will remember it next time I take pics of scrotes parking on school zigzags.
> Very interesting. Thanks for the update, will remember it next time I take pics of scrotes parking on school zigzags.
Just don't do it whilst dressed as Jimmy Saville; there's the law then there's asking for a lynch-mob...
Elsewhere on the site
On Sunday 12th October the Depot Climbing Centre Leeds held its 5th annual Battle of Britain competition. The competition has... Read more
So, just what is the Petzl RocTrip? Every year French climbing manufacturer pick a sport climbing area that has potential... Read more
Aiming at designing and producing the best belay glasses to protect climbers’ necks, Y&Y focuses on every detail to... Read more
Pete Whittaker has flashed the 32 pitch route Freerider 5.12d on El Capitan in Yosemite Valley over three days,... Read more