can of worms: Phil 101 ethics paper

I decided to research the specific laws regarding taking pictures of people in public spaces, and discovered that since the last time I had investigated the matter, a ruling I had thought still stood had been overturned in the Supreme Court of Canada. The case, originating from a resident in the Province of Quebec who successfully sued a freelance photographer for selling an image of her sitting on the steps of a public building, is the first time in Canadian history were a person's right to freedom of artistic expression in that context had ever been deemed an invasion of privacy. In 2004, the photographer and magazine were ordered jointly to pay damages in the amount of $2000.

Outside of criminal law, which covers things like voyeurism, trespassing, libelous and slanderous images, etc., under the Canadian Charter of Rights we are guaranteed freedom of expression and consequently the right to take pictures of whomever and whatever we choose in public places. We also have the right to privacy. Although it would be unreasonable to have a law barring people from taking pictures in public places and/or posting them on 'personal' sites, both Quebec and Saskatchewan have laws in place protecting an individual's right to their image when there is money exchanged for that image. It does not bar people from taking pictures for personal use, and makes provisions for a) things that are 'newsworthy' and b) celebrities and other public figures.

I have decided to do my position paper on the ethical responsibility of photographers in the Province of Alberta to obtain legal permission to sell images of identifiable people taken in public spaces. As it's a short paper, I'm limiting it to this particular very small section of the law, but obviously this opens the door to a whole pile of other questions. I'd like to pose a few questions and see how you guys feel about this particular law. If you want to get more familiar with Canadian Privacy Laws, this link is awesome.

Again, to keep the topic kind of reigned in, let's assume someone has taken identifiable pictures of you and your family at a parade without your knowledge. The questions for your consideration in this Can of Worms are:

Does it bother you that anyone can take your picture and post them on Facebook or their blog or anywhere they want? Why?
Does it make a difference if the person knows you or not? Why?
Does it make a difference to you if it's a 'good' picture vs a 'bad' picture of you? (be honest)
If a freelance photographer sold a 'good' picture of you to appear in advertising for the parade without your knowledge or consent would you be upset? Why?
Would it make a difference if the person was a friend or acquaintance? Why?

Comments

Anonymous said…
yes*, no, no, yes, no.

*facebook privacy rules are a bit unsettling, in and of themselves.
ticblog said…
If the person is a friend and they take a picture of you, post it, and tag you on Facebook, you know about it. If they take your picture and don't tag you, or if a complete stranger takes it, chances are good you'll never know about it. In fact, chances are good you're already all over the place in the background of other people's pictures. At least if you know the person you're likely to know about the picture. Does this fall under the category of, "What you don't know can't hurt you?" And if you find out, do you think you should have the right to order them to take it down?
Anonymous said…
I think people who say it doesn't make a difference if it is a good or bad picture of themselves are liars.
ticblog said…
I'm going to go out on a limb and assume we have two different anonymous posters. I'm going to refer to you as Anon 1 (to whom the previous response was directed) and Anon 2 (to whom this response is directed.) Anon, I'm inclined to agree with you, to some degree, that a person is more likely to be upset if the picture isn't a nice one. Speaking for myself, I tell you true, I don't care how good or bad the picture is, I don't want pictures of me tagged in Facebook. I'm not unreasonable - I understand that there are going to be times I show up in pictures with or without my knowledge - but being identified in them crosses the line between me being a random person, and an individual. I prefer my anonymity, thank you, whether I look like a bombshell or a fallout victim.
kate said…
I am so behind in the world of facebook. I'll have to think about these questions for a bit.
A Fellow Photographer said…
Does it bother you that anyone can take your picture and post them on Facebook or their blog or anywhere they want? Why?

[ It doesn't as long as they ask me if they can tag me in it or not first. And as long as it is a picture I would put of myself ]

Does it make a difference if the person knows you or not? Why?

[ If the person knows me I can understand, if they don't it is a little odd. I would wonder why they took my picture and put it up ]

Does it make a difference to you if it's a 'good' picture vs a 'bad' picture of you? (be honest)

[ It makes a very big difference to me personally!!! It better be good or I will be asking for it to be taken down]

If a freelance photographer sold a 'good' picture of you to appear in advertising for the parade without your knowledge or consent would you be upset? Why?

[ Yup and unless I signed a release I will be looking for compensation . A photographer should get a model release from people they photograph in public ]

Would it make a difference if the person was a friend or acquaintance? Why?

[ nope would make no difference, I would HOPE they would share the compensation with me especially since they didn't ask my permission. If they took my photo for fun and put it up for fun in their blog , go ahead as long as I look good !]
fmartell2 said…
Does it bother you that anyone can take your picture and post them on Facebook or their blog or anywhere they want? Why?

Not at all, I am a bit narcissistic, and I like having people admire me.

Does it make a difference if the person knows you or not? Why?

Not at all, Know me or don't know me, if you have a picture feel free to post it.

Does it make a difference to you if it's a 'good' picture vs a 'bad' picture of you? (be honest)

YES, if it was a horrible picture I would want it removed, a not so good picture, I might not like it but I will accept it. Pictures that are GREAT.... keep'em comin

If a freelance photographer sold a 'good' picture of you to appear in advertising for the parade without your knowledge or consent would you be upset? Why?

No. It would just mean that more people were looking at ME

Would it make a difference if the person was a friend or acquaintance? Why?

I would hope that a friend would ask first, just out of politness, or acknowledgment. But I would never say no.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

Unless otherwise noted, writing and watermarked images on this blog are copyrighted to Hope Walls.