Andy H STi

Just some advice wanted.

What is the law regarding the posting of pictures on the internet without the permission of the person on the picture?

The reason I ask is that on a recent night out, my girlfriends friend took a picture of my girlfriend in a bra and thong. Now, after a falling out, has gone on to post it on certain car related forums with alot of slanderous text.

Where does she stand?

Cheers

Andy

p.s, hopefully have posted in the right forum

what would scooby do

As far as I know, nobody has copyright of their own image, but any slanderous remarks are covered by law - just call the free service called the police

Freak

copyright is owned by whoever took the picture.

Andy H STi

But the picture was posted on the internet without permission? Is there nothing to cover this?

cheers guys

Daz34

Do you have a link to the pics??

Andy H STi

LoL

They are in my "personnal folder"

Daz34

Nah not buying that. You said websites

Andy H STi

They have been taken down now

But stored just incase.

Andy

GarethE

iTrader: (1)

As far as I am aware there is no specific law requiring the permission of the subject in the photograph as long as the photograph was taken in a public place and with their knowledge.

The grey area starts when the subject is in a private area without public access, as in paparazzi style shots, which can be deemed invasion of privacy - although again the law is pretty vague on this.

So long as the person posting the pic owns the copyright, or has the copyright owners permission (usually the person who took the photograph, or the person who owns the film), there is not a lot that can really be done.

However, in this case you mention slanderous comments. This changes things. If a caption or comment is slanderous/libelous (sp) then an offence has been committed, although legal action is not really practical.

My advice would be to contact the webmaster of the site and ask for the pictures and captions to be removed as the may be slander, as I'm sure Simon will back up, if there is any doubt, he wouldn't take the chance if there was a legal implication (BTW not implying the pics are on this site, just using our webmaster as an example)

These comments are made as I understand the law as a photographer, but I'll bow to anyone with specific legal training as regards the advice

Hope you get it sorted.

Gareth

Andy H STi

Cheers Gareth, the photos were taken in a hotel room while she was getting changed.

So again, its a sticky one, permission to take the photos could be argued.

Cheers for the help, might just let it go, or payback can be a bitch

CHeers

Andy

GarethE

iTrader: (1)

If the pics/captions have been removed from the site I'd forget about, tough I know, but the legal course of action isn't worth it - it would cost a fortune, and you would gain virtually s0d all.

Sorry m8

Brit_in_Japan

[pedantic]
Defaming somone's reputation using the written word (e.g. on a website) is libel. Slander is defaming someone's reputation using the spoken word.
[/pedantic]

The only course of action is to threaten legal action will be taken for libel if the offending material isn't removed. No website wants to get involved in legal action so they would probably remove it if asked (which sounds like what happened).

andypugh2000

Would be if i saw them

*Sonic*

Andy remind me of what she looks like again LOL

Scooby96

Cheers Gareth, the photos were taken in a hotel room while she was getting changed

Dodgy ******

ps lets have a look!

Scooby96

Dont tell me - you submitted them to www.ratemycameltoe.com

andypugh2000

quality

GarethE

iTrader: (1)

Oooppps, correct....substitute libel for slander in my earlier post

*Sonic*

Damn you have to login to see more than ten camel toes

talizman

iTrader: (1)

LMAO!

Andy H STi

LoL

Cheeky matey! Oh yeah, forgot you and the St.Helens lads had seen her ( just not in the same light as the photos )

Andy

P.S You werent on teh M6 yesterday ( on the Thelwall )

*Sonic*

yep seen her in the flesh so to speak, although she was very quiet that night

Nope wasnt me on the M6 yesterday

angrynorth

OK.

The simple answer is, if you use someone's likeness in an image without them signing a model release form, you are in some serious do-do.

I work in design and every image we use has to be paid for royalties etc. If you use a picture with a person in it (for anything) you have to have them sign a release form. If your girlfriends ex-friend doesn't have a release form, she is breaking the law.

You don't have any copyrights over your likeness but you can control when and where it appears.

Threaten legal action, speak to a intellectual copyright specialist solicitor and that will fix it for you.

talizman

iTrader: (1)

Realistically though, the average punter in the street won't have the mean to pursue full on legal action, so most folk won't be phased by "empty" threats.

GarethE

iTrader: (1)

What you have mentioned is technically correct,but should read "could be in serious do-do", as there is no legal obligation for model release forms to be signed.

I photograph people every day of the week for various assignments, some with their knowledge and some without. Only one of my clients insists on model release forms, but that is just to ensure that their audit system is up to date, and that they have written consent from their models.

Model release forms are usually signed by professional models/pro photographers involving a financial contract, to outline the use of the image. It's not the same as paying lroyalties.

I recently had to photograph the crowd at the Millennium Stadium for the FA Cup final, imagine having to get everyone to sign a model release form

As it stands, you would have to take legal action without any form of legal aid, and unless you could prove that you lost out financially, or your reputation was severely damaged, the compensation wouldn't be worth it.

angrynorth

If someone were to complain that they had appeared in the crowd photo without their permission though, you would have to remove the offending photo.

We had a situation at work where a guy was photographed at Old Trafford cricket ground amongst a crowd, yet he complained and the photo had to be removed. We even ended up paying out compensation.

A solicitor will clear it up quickly either way.

Ian_S

share the pics andy, goes to check cruisin uk as most likely place for them lol

GarethE

iTrader: (1)

Fair enough, you're obviously speaking from experience there, but I find it strange you had to pay compensation...perhaps he lost his job as he was supposed to be on the sick , in which case he may be able to sue.

I still stand by my experience that in general circumstances it is impractical and non enforceable. Unless there are other legalities involved, or the website refused to remove the offending picture and caption, its not worth persuing.

Andy, FWIW, I would certainly keep a record of things that were written and when/where. If the situation continued and the pictures or comments were repeatedly posted in different locations, a solicitor may well be able to take out some sort of injunction preventing usage and require that all copies of the photograph/negatives/digital images where surrendered and destroyed if you could prove that they were being used in a malicious manner. Legal bods may be able to offer advice there.

Gareth

Andy H STi

Would that be Mr.Storey I take it???????????

Cheers for the advice, but as you say legal action is out the question. Just wanted to be able to "threaten" the bitch!

Andy