Is this Legal?

No lawyers out there in cyber space?

To my knowledge any pictures that are taken or reprinted for that matter need to be consented by the people who are said picture.

I know when I was at a few tryouts the reporters would check to make sure they could use pictures that they took of us, just like at school, teachers would send home letters of consent for parents to sign allowing them to photograph and display students.

I hope this helps.

I work for a company that does this type of photography, although we only do it through contracts with the event organizer.

Here, it is not illegal to take pictures of anyone in a public place. Should the grounds be privately held, the "owner" (i.e. school administrators) is, however, within their rights to escort the photographer from the property. Many photographers operate this way, displaying their photos on the internet.

We have had several Big Deal Amateur Athletes at events we've photographed, and many of the parents buy pics of Mr. Big Deal as well as their own. But Mr. BD and his parents would have a hard time proving in court that these photos deprived him of income that might occur should he turn out to be drafted and be as succeesful at the professional level as everyone is predicting.

There is, however, a difference if you are taking a photo in order to sell a product; then you need a model's release signed, and payment may be expected by that model.

quote:

Originally posted by Orlando:
I work for a company that does this type of photography, although we only do it through contracts with the event organizer.

Here, it is not illegal to take pictures of anyone in a public place. Should the grounds be privately held, the "owner" (i.e. school administrators) is, however, within their rights to escort the photographer from the property. Many photographers operate this way, displaying their photos on the internet.

We have had several Big Deal Amateur Athletes at events we've photographed, and many of the parents buy pics of Mr. Big Deal as well as their own. But Mr. BD and his parents would have a hard time proving in court that these photos deprived him of income that might occur should he turn out to be drafted and be as succeesful at the professional level as everyone is predicting.

There is, however, a difference if you are taking a photo in order to sell a product; then you need a model's release signed, and payment may be expected by that model.

I'm not sure how to apply all that to high school. Since it's a public school and someone takes pictures then they can sell them?

Chicks

I have been photographed in numerous places--my agent handles it all-- not getting rich

Yes, they can, Chicks.

If the school objects to the photos being taken, they may ask the photographer to leave. If a parent doesn't want pictures of their child being taken, they may ask the photographer not to; the photographer then won't....as there's no chance of a sale.

In the case of Future High Draft Pick, the parents may choose to ask the photographer not to take pictures and that may or may not happen (probably based on the relative size of the photographer and the parents and/or how assiduously the parents monitor him) If the photographer does take said photos and chooses to charge a premium for FHDP's pics over the other photos being sold....then the parents/player may have recourse. Although proving monetary damages significant enough to bother could be exceedingly difficult.

quote:

Originally posted by Orlando:
There is, however, a difference if you are taking a photo in order to sell a product; then you need a model's release signed, and payment may be expected by that model.

What constitutes a "product?"

I've been wondering about this issue in general too recently. You can find photos for sale of many college athletes. Are you saying its ok without their or the school's permission? Personally I have no problem with it...actually like that I've been able to find a few really good ones that I've bought. But I was just wondering if they had to get permission from the college or something?

Here, I had to sign a release (through the HS), for permission of any photographs to be released by my son.
He has had articles and pics taken in newspapers and given permission.
At school, in college, no one is allowed on the field for pictures unless given premission by the SID.
There are pics of my son on the internet and I have taken them wthout their permission for his album. I am sure if they didnt want that they wouldn't allow it to print, as I have noticed in a pic or two from the upstate newspapers they won't allow you to print, unless youpay for it.
However, photographing without ones consent and selling for a profit could have legal ramifications, especially if it is a minor.
I have a pic of AROD from a newspaper that showed him on the phone when he got his draft call. Anyone want to buy it?

Good question to ask the Globe or Star magazines!

A product, for example, would be to use a picture taken of a hs/college ballplayer in an advertisement for the equipment they were using. Or for use in our company's photo product --- using the body of the ballplayer in action and merging someone else's face on then selling it to that person.

It would be silly for any school, league, or tournament organizer to allow photos to be taken at their fields without getting a cut of the sales --- that's the usual deal.

I believe releases have to be signed for newspapers as the newspaper itself is ultimately a "product" and because the newspaper's lawyers doubtlessly recommend it. It's not inconceivable that a picture that's not Hard News (an arrested criminal) or a person in the public domain (entertainers, professional athletes, politicians.....not that the two examples couldn't be the same ) used in a paper could be construed as an invasion of privacy resulting in a lawsuit. A newspaper would, after all, have money to go after whereas an independent photographer wouldn't.

Photos are easily taken off the internet in any case, from our sons' school or travel team websites, for example. Photographers selling them off the 'net, however, would have software to protect their images.

"Public Domain" is the term. Unless your likeness is used to sell a specific product, and that sale or product is enhanced in some way by your likeness, then they can snap away. Exceptions would be minors, but even then, it is a little gray.

I can go to "Goggle images" and type in my son's name and pull up a dozen pictures of him. All this was done and broadcast into cyberspace without his permission.

I ran into a similar situation a number of years back. It had to do with private radio broadcasting of business information. I had the ability to monitor these radio transmissions. I asked the FCC if monitoring these transmissions was illegal. They told me the monitoring of the information was legal because it was broadcast into public domain but the use of that information after I obtained it was controlled. I would think that pictures would be much the same. It’s what you do with them afterward that is controlled. Can you say paparazzi?

Thought provoking post….

Not tying to stir the pot but what are the possible legal ramifications when Prospect Production produces a documentary like the upcoming “Showcase”? Do they get a release from every player/showcase attendee that is “panned’ by the cameras? I read somewhere on this site that PG and PP have possibly teamed up to broadcast showcase events on “webTV” so that coaches and scouts that can not attend these events have the opportunity to participate (great idea). I hate to assume anything (that’s how I get into trouble), but may I assume that PG/PP will incorporate some kind of release into the paperwork for the showcase event????? Maybe they already do. Personally I loved “Prospect” and can’t wait for “Showcase” to be released.

Fungo… HS baseball paparazzi! Oh the humanity…….

“The reason baseball calls itself a game, I believe, is that it is too screwed up to be a business.” ~ Jim Bouton

Your decision to participate in a public venue implies consent ...

... I think you are going a bit overboard with this consent thing guys, else you could never show a "crowd shot" at a baseball game, football game, or on the evening news when there is a wreck or fire.

When you are in a public place, your picture may be taken. They don't need your consent to take it, they don't need your consent to broadcast it. If they did, the news organizations would have folded decades ago.

The baseball Paparazzi. Unless the facility says no cameras, you're open game I think.

HighHardHeeat: You got that right...Where would such "print media" (note the careful wording) such as The National Enquierer, Star and all those other rags be if they needed permission to shoot and print...