|
|
|
|
||||
|
Welcome to the GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. |
 |
|
|||||||
| Discuss what's fucking going on, and which programs are best and worst. One-time "program" announcements from "established" webmasters are allowed. |
|
|
Thread Tools |
07-15-2006, 11:22 PM
|
#1 |
|
Confirmed User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Colorado
Posts: 244
|
pictures in public? legality?
correct me if im wrong, but i want to be sure... if i took pictures in a public setting, i'm free to publish them as i please?? this must be right or paparazzi wouldn't be able to do so... right?
|
|
|
|
07-15-2006, 11:29 PM
|
#2 | |
|
Too lazy to set a custom title
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Far far away - as possible
Posts: 14,956
|
Quote:
 Paparazzi pics of public figures may or may not be "legal" depending on whatever country - anyways, that has little to do with "public settings". Depends what the pics are - if it's simply people in a street, no problem. If it's pics up skirts in a street - another story.
__________________
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat. |
|
|
|
|
|
07-15-2006, 11:30 PM
|
#3 |
|
Too lazy to set a custom title
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 10,127
|
very difficult legal issue
|
|
|
|
|
07-15-2006, 11:31 PM
|
#4 |
|
Confirmed User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Paradise
Posts: 1,047
|
not sure what the EXACT kaw is - but to answer your sweeping question - yes and no. you can publish them as you please (as paparazzi do), but you can also be sued if the person you take photos of is personally damaged (like celebrities often are).
editorial use is generally accepted, commercial use is questionable without model releases. i knew a guy who took a photo of two elderly people standing on the beach at sunset from behind. no way to tell who they were. he sold the photo for a billboard advertising adult diapers. the people recognized themselves in the ads - and even though nobody else would ever know it was them - they were offended and sued the photographer for everything he had. it's ALWAYS best to have a model release for commercial purposes.
__________________
 ladyboygold.com | joonmali.com | lilykoh.com | ashakumara.com | girlslovetoys.com POTD/MOTD/GOTD | Geo-IP Fansigns | Custom Gallery Builder | RSS Feeds 60% Revshare | 10% Webmaster Referral | Console Free | 100% EXCLUSIVE | ICQ: 194519692 |
|
|
|
|
07-15-2006, 11:31 PM
|
#5 |
|
Confirmed User
Industry Role:
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tampa yomebe -at- hotmail
Posts: 3,980
|
post the pics!
__________________
 Brothels and Escorts Worldwide. |
|
|
|
|
07-15-2006, 11:36 PM
|
#6 | |
|
Confirmed User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Colorado
Posts: 244
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
07-16-2006, 07:45 AM
|
#7 |
|
Confirmed User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 187
|
If you take for example a picture of a church and there are some people in fron t of it within the picture, it's legal. If your main aspect are the people in fron of the church, it's not legal. That easy.
A magazines counts different: If a paparazzi photo is published, and the magazines will sell 40.000 time more copies which makes an earning of for e.g. $60.000 but the have to pay the girl/guy for this $30.000 (as the court will deceide) they are still on the winning site :D |
|
|
|
