Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Eric Welch wrote: >...if one is in public, they have no legal power to tell a photographer no, >you can't photograph me. Actually I would have every bit the 'legal power' to tell a photographer not to take my picture. It is provided by the same 1st amendment you hide behind, freedom of speech. Hypothetical situation: I'm famous (ha), and a recluse. Your paper assigns you to get my picture. You spot me on the street, explain who you are, and that you're there to get the shot nobody else has. If I tell you not to, there's nothing wrong with that. If you persist, thereby escalating the situation, then I have certain additional rights to protect myself from physical harm. If you thrust your lens into my face in a threatening manner (and all it has to be is threatening to me) I have every right to protect myself with whatever action I deem appropriate at the time. Unless your privilege of gathering news precludes my right to pass freely on the street, or protect myself from attack? What I've been trying to discern is only about the taking of the photo, not what is done with it after. The right to publish doesn't make breaking the law to get the photo righteous. I couldn't imagine a professional photojournalist having occluded two precepts allowing the misconception their rights supercede another persons.