Taking pictures of those subjects who don't want their pictures taken

[The_Traveler]

I WOULD have, most certainly, taken that picture. Just to show the conditions the area's herders encounter, as a way to document the harshness of the climate/geography

This is the road back.
The High Atlas Mountains are in the background

 

[limr]

What is even the point of this whole thread anyway? Seriously? Is it to reaffirm the opinion you already hold if someone says yes to this picture? Or to wait for people to disagree so you can convince them that yours is the 'correct' opinion?

It is a discussion to get people to explore their own opinions on a tricky subject.
The Socratic method.
Why are you implying something more?

I've stated my opinions; could you point out where I have said that anyone else's is incorrect.

I could, but I have no interest in playing this game.

 

[The_Traveler]

Your choice.
As I've said before, this is a discussion about photography, in the photography discussion forum and I have done nothing but ask questions to try to define opinion.
The discussion has been pleasant, informative and illustrative of what others think.

 

[Original katomi]

Re the taking photos of copyrighted things.... I ask the question would I like it if somebody copied my photo
I left one very popular web site because I found people could copy my work.
Ask the question how would I feel if someone copied my work before knowingly photographing something that is copyrighted.

 

[limr]

Re the taking photos of copyrighted things.... I ask the question would I like it if somebody copied my photo
I left one very popular web site because I found people could copy my work.
Ask the question how would I feel if someone copied my work before knowingly photographing something that is copyrighted.

Did you post this in the wrong thread?

 

[Original katomi]

Lime Hi
Somewhere in the above thread someone was asking a question about photographing something that was copyrighted. My reply was my personal feeling on the matter and I asked the question how whoever posted would feel. If this in the wrong place or is considered wrong please delete
Thanks

 

[limr]

Lime Hi
Somewhere in the above thread someone was asking a question about photographing something that was copyrighted. My reply was my personal feeling on the matter and I asked the question how whoever posted would feel. If this in the wrong place or is considered wrong please delete
Thanks

Apologies - I see now that a post had been edited by the OP to add a second question about copyright.

I really don't understand how copyright is coming into a thread about street photography in Muslim countries. Seems like the goalposts keep changing.

 

[JonFZ300]

I really don't understand how copyright is coming into a thread about street photography in Muslim countries. Seems like the goalposts keep changing.

I just re-read the thread and came here to post this exact sentiment. The goalposts have been moved 3 or 4 times in this thread. I always try to make a point of answering the questions asked in the OP (I did) and making everything everything relevant to the thread title or initial idea. Only about a page and a half of this thread relates to the thread title and original idea. The rest has been, "OK but what about this scenario?" I'm not bothered by it, but it seems odd and bordering on trying to find an argument where there isn't one.

I don't do candid street photography and, frankly, it's not for me as an art form. I understand what it's supposed to do and there are some compelling images out there but it seems more like journalism than art to me. And that Jackass shooting his flash in peoples' faces would get a new camera (and maybe some new teeth) if he did that to me. lol

 

[The_Traveler]

Well, since I did most/all of the question posting, I might have the answer to what links these questions together, but no one asked me.

 

[waday]

Re the taking photos of copyrighted things.... I ask the question would I like it if somebody copied my photo
I left one very popular web site because I found people could copy my work.
Ask the question how would I feel if someone copied my work before knowingly photographing something that is copyrighted.

I get your point. I really do. But, I personally don’t think it's as cut and dry as you state.

If someone is directly stealing your work, that's one thing. But, photographing something that is copyrighted is different--and I think it really depends on the end use of the photo and the subject of the photo.

What if you’re in Times Square NYC, and you want to take a picture. There are likely hundreds of copyrighted images/ads/etc everywhere, to the point where it’d be nearly impossible to take a picture without getting a copyrighted something in the photo. Did you track down all owners of copyrights here?

Or, what if you're taking a portrait of someone with a visible tattoo? Did you get the tattoo artist’s approval prior to taking the photo?

Or, what about eyeglasses? The design and style of my eyeglasses are probably copyrighted, so can I take a selfie wearing glasses? Or am I now infringing on the designer's copyright?

ETA: Also, note that my questions are as vague as Lew's.

 

[limr]

Re the taking photos of copyrighted things.... I ask the question would I like it if somebody copied my photo
I left one very popular web site because I found people could copy my work.
Ask the question how would I feel if someone copied my work before knowingly photographing something that is copyrighted.

I get your point. I really do. But, I personally don’t think it's as cut and dry as you state.

If someone is directly stealing your work, that's one thing. But, photographing something that is copyrighted is different--and I think it really depends on the end use of the photo and the subject of the photo.

What if you’re in Times Square NYC, and you want to take a picture. There are likely hundreds of copyrighted images/ads/etc everywhere, to the point where it’d be nearly impossible to take a picture without getting a copyrighted something in the photo. Did you track down all owners of copyrights here?

Or, what if you're taking a portrait of someone with a visible tattoo? Did you get the tattoo artist’s approval prior to taking the photo?

Or, what about eyeglasses? The design and style of my eyeglasses are probably copyrighted, so can I take a selfie wearing glasses? Or am I now infringing on the designer's copyright?

ETA: Also, note that my questions are as vague as Lew's.

If I may, eyeglasses are more likely to be protected under a design patent or trademark rather than copyright, so a photo may still be problematic, but in a different, more limited way (e.g. exposing a not-yet patented prototype that can now be copied before the inventor/designer can file.)

But overall point taken. </pedantry>

 

[Fujidave]

The other thing I love about street photography is, as everyone might know you Don`t have to have a person in the image at all it could be an image that shows a scene where a person might of been in.

 

[SquarePeg]

I WOULD have, most certainly, taken that picture. Just to show the conditions the area's herders encounter, as a way to document the harshness of the climate/geography

This is the road back.
The High Atlas Mountains are in the background


View attachment 171398

Nice photo. I wish the top of the tree hadn't been cut off. Was this cropped?

 

[vintagesnaps]

Oh now Derrel, don't you know it's in Monty Python? (I'll spare this thread from going further in another direction and post it in the Leaderboard!)

It seems like this thread could be three separate ones; it started with a generalization then a specific situation that to me seemed to be the real reason for the thread. But I guess it wasn't, and I don't know how copyright got into it. I don't know international copyright to know about photos taken in another country.

It's not just about taking a photo, it's about usage. If the man in the distance on one of the animals (which look like long eared cows or long legged goats!) didn't ask you to not take the picture, and he didn't yell at you or glare at you or otherwise indicate to leave him alone, then it's probably fine to take the picture since the vast desert seems to be a public enough place. In the US, a photo that is mostly animals and a whole lot of sand would be fine to use since there is one human being on an animal who isn't recognizable.

If you want to take a picture of the Eiffel Tower for personal use or as an art print or for editorial use, that should not need permisson or a release (if the Eiffel Tower was in the US). If you want to slap photos of the Eiffel Tower on T shirts or mugs to sell (retail use), or use them commercially (business, advertising use), that would violate copyright/trademark (if you moved the Eiffel Tower to say, Vegas). Anyone can look up info. on the US Copyright Office website or try pro photographers organization like ASMP or PPA.

 

[Derrel]

I have lately been in a Muslim country where many potential subjects definitely don't want their photos taken because of a disputed passage in their scriptures.

Is Picture Taking Forbidden in Islam? | Synonym

What do you think about this?

I think we have applied a good dose of the "Socratic method' to the original post, as well as to subsequent additional questions.