Law: Freelance Photography Involving Children

largelylivin · February 23, 2008

I was talking about the freelance aspects of my business with someone who was NOT a photographer or a lawyer but is involved in organizing school outings. I showed him some examples of my freelance work, which included some photos taken at a fishing tournament for children, he reacted very strongly and stated that it was against Federal Law for anyone to post photographs of minors on the internet without their parents explicit permission. Here's an example of one of the photos that he saw:

Here's the whole gallery http://smile-123.smugmug.com/gallery/3209203_H9y9t/1/177225693_tj9LN

Now, I've tried to understand the law with regards to photographing people and property that are in public places because freelance photos of boats and people, etc, is a big part of what I do. I understand, I think, about the need for a model release and possibly property releases in order to "publish" a photo. I think I have a pretty good idea what is indecent or bordering on pornography, and always intend to not even approach that line. Heck, nowadays I wouldn't post the old Coppertone ad, if you're old enough to remember that one.

I have searched the web and cannot find anything remotely applicable. Everything that I find deals with indecency, porn, and morphed photos. I have found articles the warn parents about posting their childrens photos, along with their names and adresses, on the internet. If I happened to know the child's or address, I would never post it.

Can anyone tell me if such a law exists and where I can read about it?

Does anyone see any ethical issue about what I am doing?

SavedByZero · February 23, 2008

You need to call this guy back and ask him to give the exact law, where it was written, when it went into effect and a link to it or tell him to STFU kindly.

However having done freelance for the Florida Today newspaper, any person in a public venue or area of any age and of any sex is open to have their picture taken and published with out consent. Anyone in a public area has given up their rights to privacy or any expectation of privacy.

==> http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm (download the PDF)

Other useful links to Photography Laws.

==> http://www.photosecrets.com/links.law.html

"You can take photos any place that's open to the public, whether or not it's private property. A mall, for example, is open to the public. So are most office buildings (at least the lobbies). You don't need permission; if you have permission to enter, you have permission to shoot. In fact, there are very few limits to what you're allowed to photograph. Separately, there are few limits to what you're allowed to publish. And the fact that they're separate issues — shooting and publishing — is important. We'll get to that in a moment.
You can take any photo that does not intrude upon or invade the privacy of a person, if that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. Someone walking in a mall or on the street? Fair game. Someone standing in a corner, looking at his new Prozac prescription? No. Using a long lens to shoot someone in an apartment? No.
Note that the limits have nothing to do with where you are when you take the shots; it's all about the subject's expectation of privacy. You can be on private property (a mall or office-building lobby), or even be trespassing and still legally take pictures. Whether you can be someplace and whether you can take pictures are two completely separate issues." Andrew Kantor
==> http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/andrewkantor/2005-12-29-camera-laws_x.htm

So in short this guy was giving you a load of crap and doesn't know his own butt hole from your 80-200 f2.8 lens hoods hole. But when shooting minors it is best to inform the parents as to what you're doing and why before one of them gets in your face and fists to cuff ensue shortly there after.

:ginger

largelylivin · February 23, 2008

Right. In fact, the parents were present when I took the photos.

I assumes he didn't know what he was talking about, but it can be hard to keep up with the law these days.

Cuong · April 24, 2008

Here's an interesting article dealing with photography and privacy laws:
http://www.creativepro.com/article/the-tricky-side-photo-model-releases

Cuong

MikePearce · April 25, 2008

You should be aware, however, that the laws are different depending on what country you are in.

Also, some places (at least here in the UK) have another set of rules upon them. For example, while you're legally allowed to take pictures of anyone or anything in a public place, even pictures of private property from a public place. You can't take "professional" pictures, for sale, of anywhere within Trafalgar square. You also can't take pictures of military or government installations, telecoms installations or anythign belonging to the Crown that isn't a tourist-y place (dock yards, ships etc).

Something to do with terrorism. Bunch of cr*p frankly.

In the UK, you can make commercial gains from pictures of people (inc. children) in a public place, even without a model release. However, NOT having the model release will seriously impair the international saleability of the image as most agencies have international publications and many countries require model releases for ANY recognisable person in any image.

This PDF should be in the pocket of any UK photographer, especially given the current trend of jumping on people with cameras the government is introducing:

http://www.sirimo.co.uk/ukpr.php

Law: Freelance Photography Involving Children

Comments