publishing others pictures when permission is known to be refused ▪ Iranian.com

A fellow blogger has published a photo of a lady in Iran whilst admitting to the fact that he had to take the picture covertly as she would not have given him permission to take it and certainly will not have given him permission to post it on the internet. So when I asked th photographer if he had a problem with this- his reply was that:

'You need to look at each society's local laws and regulations. While in U.S. if you take someone's picture for financial gains you need to get a release from them for publications or material gains, yet even in US you do not need any legal release if the photograph that you have taken is in a completely public domain from someone that is not the owner of that domain and your intention is not for financial gains or malicious consequences or publications. On the other hand, in Iran, a nation that has very little protection and law and order about copyrights or disclosure of names or information about a published photograph, there is absolutely no need for such thing as getting a permission. You need to follow the rules and regulations in each country. Good that you asked'.

Feeling that he had missed my point,my reply was that:

'the local laws of Iran probably allow a lot of stuff that a lot of people find distasteful. We do have our official high unpopularity ranking to vouch for it.By your own admission, the fact of the matter is the subject of the picture that you have posted here will not have given you permission to take the picture or to post it here- But who gives a damn right, you took the picture and then posted it because you think your legally in the clear. Hell it was fun too was not it--like taking candy from a baby right?'

This entire exchange has been deleted by the blogger, so as I feel there was a genuine point to be made and in the interest of freedom of speech I have reposted here.

Now It would be of interest to know the opinion of the readership. Should we be looking at pictures of others here if we know for sure they did not want them taken and they did not want them published- even though it may be legal?

Comments 8 Pending 0

Shepesh

I think the circumstances of this case are unique. Your aggrieved party can try suing the photographer whose picture you have posted, though I wouldn’t rate her chances. ;-)

khaleh mosheh

Oh dear your so fast on the uptake.. this was posted some time ago.

Khaleh Moosh-ha don't play hard to get. I was trying to bring a smile to your face. When you had the mouse avetar you and I exchanged some warm humour. I changed my avetar to Hafez in homage. How about bringing the mouse back for a while as a kind gesture? No agendas involved except Peace.

Homage to Hafez ! You really are awfully humorous Ha ha--Pull the other one. You homage to Hafez presumably is like your semi illustrious pals rumination on Hafez's sexual preferences? I recall you digging up some quasi reference in tribal support too.

Anyway I still get the avatar as a flea behind a desk for you. Obviously there is an artificial intelligence (or an anonymous observer) in the machine if you like, stopping your homage to Hafez coming through to my computer for some unbeknownst reason.

Thank you for demonstrating what you mean by Peace.

Peace is the word you used and in physical terms we have no state of being in peace or conflict given that this is indeed a virtual forum. Although I dislike the agenda you and your cohort are promoting in the most insidious fashion.

Thank you Dear Mehrban- what you say makes good sense- I find the focus on legal matters rather than ethics of putting someone's picture on the web when they clearly would not wish you to do so, also misses the point of the situation. I personally think the most artitsic of pictures would be worthless if the subject at least did not assent to being photographed.