Niece's son photo on community website

[doubleg]

I know this question has been brought up before and after several search trys, nothing pertinant is coming up that I can refer to.

Today my niece sent me a link from her city's Parks and Recreation website. They had just opened a new park and her 3 year old son was featured on one of the pieces of playground equipment. He was clearly the main subject in the photo.

I asked her if she knew his picture was being taken, she didn't. In fact, her friend forwarded her the link, so she had no idea.

Regardless of whether the photographer was employeed by the city, to me she should have asked the mothers if it was OK to photograph their children and also to ask permission to post them on their web site. It's a really small park and it would be very easy to determine who the Mom's were. She just assumed he was in a public place and "fair game". I told her I would post the question to the professionals out there.

Thanks!

[CheaperKings]

Usually, if you're in a public area you are fair game but, I'm not real sure about children. I think, if it was my child, I'd want to tell the person that they could have, at the very least, asked me first...

[dakwegmo]

Children aren't afforded any special protections, under the law, when it comes to photographing them in public places. The same rules that apply to adults apply to kids. Namely, if they are in public view they are fair game to be photographed, and those photos can be published for editorial use without their (or their parents' consent). Legally the city is in the right.

If she doesn't want it online, the best thing to do would be to contact the city and ask them to remove it.

[doubleg]

I understand both points of view.

Logic dictates to me that because it was children, and the intent was to print them on their website, ethically she should have asked. I would be sensitive to photographing small children.

And in addition, it would have been a nice gesture by the photographer to provide her credentials in the event there were photos taken that the parents would have wanted copies of.

She wasn't overly upset about it, but was concerned.

So thanks, I'll relay the opinions back to her.

[Jim Bryant]

Even if the children (under age 18) are in a public area, I always asked a parent of guardian if it's okay to take pictures of their child and explain why. To me it's just common sense.

[NicoleScraps]

Originally Posted by Jim Bryant

Even if the children (under age 18) are in a public area, I always asked a parent of guardian if it's okay to take pictures of their child and explain why. To me it's just common sense.

In my opinion, I think that should be the rule.

[i speak in math]

While photographing children or adults is legal while in a public setting, using said photograph for commercial gain is an entirely different matter. Using someones likeness without permission, unless that persons likeness is public property as in the case of the rich and famous, is not legal. Without a model release given the publisher the right to use the image, they can easily be sued for damages.

[NZMXr]

Originally Posted by NicoleScraps

In my opinion, I think that should be the rule.

While I can understand this Generally if you know your being photographed you act different even sub consciously most photographers want the subject to be as natural as possible

[Jim Poor]

Actually, the use as described doesn't constitute commercial use.

For what it's worth, selling a photo as a print even is not commercial use. In the photography world, commercial use is advertising and little else.

Originally Posted by i speak in math

While photographing children or adults is legal while in a public setting, using said photograph for commercial gain is an entirely different matter. Using someones likeness without permission, unless that persons likeness is public property as in the case of the rich and famous, is not legal. Without a model release given the publisher the right to use the image, they can easily be sued for damages.

[ML Photography]

Originally Posted by i speak in math

While photographing children or adults is legal while in a public setting, using said photograph for commercial gain is an entirely different matter. Using someones likeness without permission, unless that persons likeness is public property as in the case of the rich and famous, is not legal. Without a model release given the publisher the right to use the image, they can easily be sued for damages.

That's how it works in Italy too...