Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Photo Vultures (didtoday,getalife) [no Leica]
From: "Bryan Caldwell" <bcaldwell@softcom.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 12:14:19 -0700

>>Not in the US. That's called prior restraint, and is unconstitutional
here. <<

I think we've been through this before. Prior restraint is not per se
unconstitutional in the U.S. It is heavily disfavored by the courts and
almost always struck down, but there are certain areas where it is allowed.
There are certain subjects which do not have any First Amendment protection
and may be subject to prior restraint. There are other areas where prior
restraint on publication has been upheld by the courts and areas where
constitutional scholars suspect that it might be upheld.

Usually found unconstitutional? Yes. Per se unconstitutional? No.

Bryan



- ----- Original Message -----
From: Eric Welch <ewelch@ponyexpress.net>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>; <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 8:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Photo Vultures (didtoday,getalife) [no Leica]


> At 10:04 PM 9/21/99 -0500, Paul Schiemer wrote:
> >See, that's where I believe you missed the point I was trying to make:
> >It's not the taking of the photo but the use of it afterward.
> >In a public place it is one thing to acquire an image, but, prior to it
> >being published, if you are informed by the subject of the photograph
they
> >do NOT want it used, then you have a responsibility to acquiesce to the
> >request.
>
> Not in the US. That's called prior restraint, and is unconstitutional
here.
> But you are right in one point. Never do I ever edit in camera. I may
> choose later not to use a picture for a variety of reasons. But if I don't
> have it, I can't use it. But just because someone doesn't want me to use a
> picture that is legitimately news (or not, but that's another topic) is
> immaterial. If it is news, then with good judgement or not (hoping I will
> always use good judgement like I did for this situation), I have every
> right to use it - legally.
>
>
>
> Eric Welch
> St. Joseph, MO
>
> http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch
>
> "The surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is
> that it has never tried to contact us."  - Calvin and Hobbes
>