Agencies, Permissions and Stuff
Discussion
I notice that, on the BBC News website, a lot of the Hemel shots are Getty.
One or two of them, you can imagine, will make stunning "National Geographic" type appearances in future.
One of the shots is from the London Carnival Wheel:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/i
...and I wondered whether they go to the bother of getting permission?
Although no-one can stop you taking pictures of the Eye (under english law), the owners of the site forbid the taking of pictures on the property (which extends to the bit of the South Bank around it and certainly whilst actually on it)
Do you think they get round it by claiming that it's a "news" item - 'cos the incident is 25 or 30 miles away! Where could a line be drawn - "well I thought it was all right to take a picture, becasue I thought there was an attempted bag snatch on Pall Mall and I thought it was newsworthy"
>> Edited by beano500 on Monday 12th December 11:01
One or two of them, you can imagine, will make stunning "National Geographic" type appearances in future.
One of the shots is from the London Carnival Wheel:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/i
...and I wondered whether they go to the bother of getting permission?
Although no-one can stop you taking pictures of the Eye (under english law), the owners of the site forbid the taking of pictures on the property (which extends to the bit of the South Bank around it and certainly whilst actually on it)
Do you think they get round it by claiming that it's a "news" item - 'cos the incident is 25 or 30 miles away! Where could a line be drawn - "well I thought it was all right to take a picture, becasue I thought there was an attempted bag snatch on Pall Mall and I thought it was newsworthy"
>> Edited by beano500 on Monday 12th December 11:01
beano500 said:
the owners of the site forbid the taking of pictures on the property (which extends to the bit of the South Bank around it and certainly whilst actually on it)
unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, I never saw signs stating that when I was on it and no one stopped me videoing or photographing on or around the Eye (unless things have changed in the last couple of years)
OK - but just because there aren't signs.....
I don't think there are signs in Trafalgar Square either, for example.
...but anyway. As a useful starting point in the UK, you may like to know about this information sheet...
www.sirimo.co.uk/media/UKPhotographersRights.pdf
I don't think there are signs in Trafalgar Square either, for example.
...but anyway. As a useful starting point in the UK, you may like to know about this information sheet...
www.sirimo.co.uk/media/UKPhotographersRights.pdf
beano500 said:
OK - but just because there aren't signs.....
I don't think there are signs in Trafalgar Square either, for example.
...but anyway. As a useful starting point in the UK, you may like to know about this information sheet...
www.sirimo.co.uk/media/UKPhotographersRights.pdf
bit of a blunt reply for you wasn't it?
Anyway, the information sheet refers to commercial and business photography in the majority of cases. As it states, tourist photographs in Trafalgar square are perfectly ok as they are in most places unless an issue with security etc. You are allowed to take photographs on private land (eg the Eye etc) as well, provided that you have permission to be on the land in the first place.
So, unless you were raising the question about Getty Images etc purely due to the issue with commercial photography from the Eye then I can't see the problem. We're probably talking at cross purposes so I'll end with a
!cirks said:
bit of a blunt reply for you wasn't it?
So, unless you were raising the question about Getty Images etc purely due to the issue with commercial photography from the Eye then I can't see the problem. We're probably talking at cross purposes so I'll end with a
Sorry - didn't mean to appear blunt.
(Am busy (supposed to be) writing some training material - the subject of which is getting me a bit grumpy I think!!!!! 
) Yes, I suppose I was thinking in terms of commercial repercussions for Getty and their photographer. And yes, it's purely an academic daydream for anyone taking pictures for non-commercial purposes. Still interested to know what anyone thinks.
I say it's academic. Although there's a trend towards photographers being challenged (for instance Trafalgar Square, hence using that as an example) especially if we park a tripod on the pavement. All of us could be affected by knock on effects of these sort of trends, and sometimes it's nioce to know you're on safe ground when wielding a pixel-picker in public.....
beano500 said:
Sorry - didn't mean to appear blunt.
No problem. I know how you feel. I'm supposed to be busy writing a "Problem Determination Guide" (there's consultancy terminology for you!) and a "Technical Design Overview" neither of which anyone is ever going to read but have to be done to achieve sign-off for part of the project I'm working on
cirks said:I'll swap yer! Know anything about "Money Laundering"? Poor sods will have to take a test after reading my waffle.......
No problem. I know how you feel. I'm supposed to be busy writing a "Problem Determination Guide" (there's consultancy terminology for you!) and a "Technical Design Overview" neither of which anyone is ever going to read but have to be done to achieve sign-off for part of the project I'm working on
I feel for them! (Rather be working for Getty Images when it comes to jobs like this!!!! So you see where my thinking is?! Seems far more glamorous.)
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff