Reasonable? What do you think?

[Jan Powell]

I happened to be at an International competition recently. I’ll not mention any names but it was in the UK and involved competitors of all ages from juniors through to veterans.
Whilst there a representative of a governing body was present with a camera and large lens taking random photographs of the competitors, their families, ground staff, exhibitors and just about anything else that took their fancy. All the photographs were taken outside but within the confines of the shooting ground and not in a public place. Whilst some were posed, a great many seemed to have been taken from a distance away (with the aforementioned lens) and, judging by the images, the person captured was clearly unaware the picture was being taken.

Later the same day many of the images appeared online attached to the governing bodies social media pages, all of which are publicly visible. As far as I know permission was neither sought nor given to either take the picture or publish the result.

Whilst I realise for the juniors social media’s a way of life, I find this quite troubling. Although I was at the event in an official capacity and wasn’t one of those photographed, It seems to me an infringement of privacy as well as rather rude for the photographer to act as they have. I don’t have an issue with the taking of the photographs per se but I do think permission should be sought to take and especially to publish.

What do others think? Do you agree or am I a little out of touch with today’s sensibilities?

 

[Cosmicblue]

I'd be cool with it, publicising events with real-world images as opposed to 'stock photos' appeals to me.

 

[tiptop]

Suppose it depends on which governing body, and the terms and conditions of entry. Especially what the commercial rights are.

 

[perazman]

I was surprised to see images of myself on facebook after the British Open. I'm assuming there's something in the small print which allows this. Just as well I wasn't pulling a sickie!

PM.

 

[Jonny English]

In public there is nothing to stop them taking pictures and publishing them, it's completely legal. When on private land they have to have the landowners permission to take pictures or footage. The only place it is illegal to photograph someone is where they can expect privacy such as in they're own home. If they have the ground owners permission then they are fully within they're rights to photograph and publish them. It would be nice to ask permission, but it's just not reasonably practicable.

 

[tiptop]

I was surprised to see images of myself on facebook after the British Open. I'm assuming there's something in the small print which allows this. Just as well I wasn't pulling a sickie!

PM.

For the purposes of this Code of Conduct “Participation” shall mean any events in which the CPSA or CPSA sanctions such as ICTSC Home Internationals, ICTSF World championships and any other Championships.

COMMERCIAL RIGHTS

To allow the CPSA and (where agreed) its commercial partners, the right to use my name, signature, image, likeness, voice, biography and performances for such reasonable promotional/publicity purposes directly in connection with an event(s) as the CPSA may designate from time to time, provided that the CPSA may not use or authorise such use in a manner that suggests the member directly endorse any specific product or service.

Terms & Conditions (cpsa.co.uk)

 

[ips]

An interesting question.....first thoughts are having ones picture taken and put out there without consent is wrong. I also think the same about celebrity pics taken covertly. I have had issues on FB with pics, i won't elaborate but I no longer post pics of anyone but myself my wife and daughter ...

 

[Luke_(NL)]

I agree that the subjects should have A) been made aware that pictures would be taken throughout the day, so that they could opt out. More importantly (B), there should be actual consent prior to publication. A blurb as per the above in terms and conditions wouldn't cut the legal mustard here as per the GDPA, unless it was actually handed out in writing as part of an actual agreement.  Even so, it happens everywhere. I was at a comp yesterday where at the very end, when half of the attendees had left, a photographer stated that pictures would be published unless she was contacted by anyone asking her not to. No contact details were provided however B)  

 

[ColinD]

Lot of the time this sort of thing is in the small print of the entry form you fill in,especially the online type where it says click here for terms and condidtions, you know the one that 99% never click on

 

[jasper]

Ian Coleys have something in their terms of entry( to comps) that photos etc may be taken and used for promo etc. If you don't wish photos to be taken you just inform them on booking in. Seems a fair way to go about things. 

Jasper. 

 

[ColinD]

I suppose it depends on if you win anything, as that would be a nightmare to police if random photos were used.

So only hope for my ugly mug  being on anything would be the random ones then

 

[Wonko the Sane]

I'm with Jan, sort of I suppose.  Seems to me that the situation at a shoot where there is a FEE to participate should be that permission to publish would have to be sought.  The need to deny permission is BS IMO at any rate when I'm paying for some event.

JMO of course but it's not like I have any need to worry about it hahaha

 

[ColinD]

A lot of shoots now (target shooting) have a clause, by entering you have agreed that photos of you may be used in promoting the sport.

When someone asked that they should ask permission before publishing, if your not happy with that don't enter was used.

It's then your choice, if you don't like it don't enter the competition

 

[Jonny English]

It's an impossible task to seek permission of everyone shooting and remove any pictures of anyone who declines. If one person declines permission how do you know who they are in several hundred pictures unless you know them all personally or their name is on show.

 

[Luke_(NL)]

It's an impossible task to seek permission of everyone shooting and remove any pictures of anyone who declines. If one person declines permission how do you know who they are in several hundred pictures unless you know them all personally or their name is on show.

That is turning things upside down. There is no obligation or need to publish photos of all of the people either. There is a desire to publish some photos for reasons akin to advertising, which is fine. Just select such photos on the basis of having, or being able to obtain, actual consent and you’re set. Dumping every photo taken on the internet without asking or even telling people is not the way to approach this as an organisation. 

 

[ColinD]

Perhaps they should do what the tv news does, blur everyones face so they can't be recognized. That would look good on the 'try our sport promotions' eveyone with their face blanked out carrying a gun

 

[Jan Powell]

I suppose it depends on if you win anything, as that would be a nightmare to police if random photos were used.

So only hope for my ugly mug  being on anything would be the random ones then

I think winners have to expect a degree of publicity. I don't think it unreasonable that governing bodies, promoters, sponsors and such like display winners photographs in print and online. That's a far cry from what's happening here though.

It's an impossible task to seek permission of everyone shooting and remove any pictures of anyone who declines. If one person declines permission how do you know who they are in several hundred pictures unless you know them all personally or their name is on show.

I don't agree. It seems fairly simple to me. Take a photograph and simply ask those pictured, am I OK to publish this? If yes, pop them on the list. If no, cross them off. We're not talking about thousands of photographs here, maybe a hundred or so.

What gets me more than anything is the sneakiness of it. Many of those captured clearly had no knowledge their picture was being taken. Doing this is naughty enough, to then upload it onto social media without their consent is just plain wrong.

I think there's a balance to be found here between personal privacy and the organisers wish to make the event look interesting. Perhaps in this social media age there's an assumption that anything goes and the wackier the better. They'd be wise to remember that personal privacy means a lot to some people.

 

[Wonko the Sane]

What gets me more than anything is the sneakiness of it. Many of those captured clearly had no knowledge their picture was being taken. Doing this is naughty enough, to then upload it onto social media without their consent is just plain wrong.

That's pretty difficult to argue against.  I mean, how much trouble would it be to ask if it was OK to take a pic?

 

[Martinj]

Like it or loathe it there are thousands of people out there making a living out of it

Oh wow I just graduated to "Apprentice" on the strength of this, it's like I regressed 50 years

ll