[Leica] Photo Vultures (didtoday,getalife) [no Leica]

["Paul Schiemer" <schiemer@magicnet.net>]

There's a good book (or two) which deals with issues of photography and the
law (probably even has that title). I read it some many years ago.
Rather than read here the unqualified contributions of lay people <as it
regards the legal soundings of these issues> why doesn't someone refer to
what the law REALLY is? [This is not an invitation to the lawyers among us
to pontificate on the matter though]. Use the book.

Now, the vulture thing; clipping liberally from an Eric Welch contribution:
>He looked pretty much like he was going to die. No response from
>him, his hand was limp when the paramedic raised and dropped it.
Limp limbs are not an indicator of pending expiration.
Thank goodness for that. Or many 'dead drunks' would end up interred.

>his mother stepped in front of me and said "I don't want a picture of him in
>the paper." She was obviously in distress, and not thinking clearly...
1st; telling you this was sufficient to make you stop. Legally, you are
bound to comply with the request (which is not about the 'taking' of the
photo, but the use of it afterward). 2nd; if she was thinking clearly she
would have realized this was her sons' 15 minutes of fame?

> I indicated that if he wasn't all right in the end, we wouldn't run the photo
>anyway...
So your paper draws the line on certain content? Like, 'no dead people'?
Dismemberment, maiming, general carnage okay. Or, 'if it bleeds, it leads'?
Let's hear it for your street side manners too, "If your boy dies we won't
run the picture lady." Probably was very reassuring to her at the time....

In reflection on the many points rendered here on this general issue I think
it has to do with timing more than anything else. That any photographer
perceives the critical moment is something he has control over (or right to)
is probably incorrect.
The scene is playing all by itself, with or without the photographer. S/he
just happens to be there at the same time. Ultimately it is the small sliver
of time s/he captures and what is done with it that matters. And that is the
ONLY thing the photographer has real control over.
To do it well you don't have to impose upon anyone, nor invade their space.
You also don't have to subject anyone to rude behavior just because they
happen to be in public. No means no. Overstep that boundary, that then could
be considered assault. What happens after that is photographers fault.