Is it unethical to use guest pictures on website

[Marcus Ian]

<p>"Now, I was just wondering if simply your mere presence in this area is deemed apt "consideration," (i.e., in lieu of a signed release), and therefore, legally valid acceptance of this contract."</p>

<p>It is. Exactly in the same way a EULA is. ie. you agree to the terms if you choose to enter (just like if you choose to run a piece of software, you agree to the licensing agreement). The placement on the entry door (and other conspicuous locations) makes it pretty hard to argue that you 'didn't know' or chose not to give consent (unless you are illiterate of course). Not saying it couldn't be done, but it'd sure be an uphill battle!</p>

[studio460]

<p>Marcus said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>Exactly in the same way a EULA is. ie. you agree to the terms if you choose to enter (just like if you choose to run a piece of software, you agree to the licensing agreement).</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Good analogy--makes sense.</p>

[john_h.1]

<p>Wow. Sorry for the commotion there Ralph. <br /><br />Anyway, as to the legal questions (the sub-forum we are in), there are more resources on the "invasion of privacy" aspect if you are interested. For a comprehensive resource on all these other issues as well, one recommendation is Attorney Bert Krages' book which is lays it all out in easy to understand explanations... </p>

<p>http://www.amazon.com/Legal-Handbook-Photographers-Rights-Liabilities/dp/1608954757/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1396460379&sr=1-1<br /><br />As to ethical considerations, my personal opinion is that it is not unethical to post the images as samples per se but, it is courteous to obtain consent. Particularly, with those best images shown on a website with potential high volume review. It would be rude and unhelpful for the business to leave up images that requested to be taken down certainly. For full wedding samples viewed more privately or at your studio, Its probably unrealistic to get everyone's approval but its important for prospective clients see a full fair sample of your work. I think that's where the knowledge of being photographed comes in. Everyone tends to know that their likeness will be seen by others. Since it isn't part of full fledged advertising and somewhat unrealistic, it seems less necessary to get full fledged approval from everyone. As long as there's nothing unflattering or negative in some way.<br /><br />So, high visibility featured sample shots, get consent, privately comprehensive full wedding portfolios, Get consent for prominently featured people if you can. In my view at least. </p>

[lindsay_dobson]

<p>I understand that US law appears to be under discussion in this thread and in fact it is largely based upon the English law. There are therefore broad similarities, however as John has said in the US there can be variance, usually by State. Here in the UK there are (currently) no legal issues with posting images of wedding guests (and their children) on your commercial website - providing that you are acting in accordance with a wedding couple or "event organiser" who have in turn made it known to their guests that a photographer will be in attendance. In fact it is a normal presumption that a wedding will be photographed professionally, and that those present will be in a number of the photographs, and that they will be displayed in a manner which will allow guests and non-attendants access after the fact.</p>

<p>In this day and age it is a given that such photographs are shared online, usually publicly, and this would be considered appropriate usage - so in attending the event guests are offering their implied consent to such usage. If guests do not wish to be photographed then the alternative is to absent themselves from all areas where photography is taking place, or else to stay at home. </p>

[savagesax]

John H Thank you for the links! Well done. Thats why you are a "HERO!"

 

One of the fears of using kids are the jerks that copy/steal the kids faces in websites and create "Nasty," results. Same with adults. I will leave it at that.

[craig_gillette]

<p>Well, I've plugged through this sort of thing several times. The US and UK laws differ, as do the laws in several other English speaking countries. In the US, the right of publicity and/or privacy laws are established at the state level and they do differ from state to state. It's easy enough to look up the basic laws covering privacy or the right of publicity in any location. </p>

<p>If one is going to be running a business, then it's only sensible to go to a competent, local attorney for questions on this. Here's the kind of reference one can find. this is California's. Certainly a place to start if trying to decide if this is worthy of getting good advice versus forum advice.</p>

<p>http://corporate.findlaw.com/litigation-disputes/practitioner-s-guide-to-california-right-of-publicity-law.html</p>

<p> </p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>Here in the UK there are (currently) no legal issues with posting images of wedding guests (and their children) on your commercial website - providing that you are acting in accordance with a wedding couple or "event organiser" who have in turn made it known to their guests that a photographer will be in attendance.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br /><br />I was fairly sure that under English law, you have the right to not have your image used in advertising if you don't want to. Having the permission of the wedding couple or organiser isn't enough unless they have made it known before the event to every guest whose images are used. I'm sure this doesn't happen. It certainly hasn't at any wedding I have been to as a guest.</p>

[steve m smith]

<p>However... the OP asked if it was unethical, not illegal!</p>

[lindsay_dobson]

<p>Steve - that is correct, there is provision under section 84a of the Copyright act, and that refers to the rights of privacy where photography has been commissioned for "private and domestic purposes". A wedding would of course fall into that category, but as I have said your client in this case (as would be the case in any similar event) would be the bride and groom and they are acting as "event controllers". In this situation, in order for the images to be published, they would need to give their consent and also make those in attendance aware that professional photography is taking place. This is normally very obvious at a wedding, and therefore the guests realise that they will be photographed and that the photographs are likely to be published in a number of ways. This is what is meant by "informed consent" or "implied consent". Either would be adequate where a wedding is concerned (in our jurisdiction).</p>

<p>However, as you said in your addendum, the discussion is not necessarily about the legalities - and that would raise the question of how any one photographer would act should a guest later request that any published photographs are taken down. The reasoning behind that does not fall into commercial use, but rather the fact that the guest feels their privacy has in some way been breached. Whilst legally it has not (in the UK) the photographer would then make a decision as to whether or not to remove the offending pictures. I hope that clarifies things - for the record, this is based on direct information given to me by a very experienced legal adviser. </p>