Safeguarding issue on photo 16 years old
Discussion
Bit of a tricky one. Local Parish council has used a photo I took (with my permission) for a poster promoting a community fun day in the summer. The photo was taken at a similar event in 2006 and features my kids and a couple of their mates in face paint playing tug-o-war - normal fun stuff. The same image has been used a few times in the village over the years.
One of the girls featured, prompted by her mother, has mounted her high-horse and is threatening all manner of legal action for breech of privacy and the like. The back story to this is that her mother was previously the clerk of the Parish Council and left a year ago under a bit of a cloud and has made it her business since to do all she can to disrupt what they do.
They've removed the photo from future publicity but has already appeared in the village newsletter. I'm 99% certain that there's no legal issue given the length of time between the photo being taken and used, the fact that the identity of the children are masked by virtue of face paint (I thought the girl in question was in fact my niece!!) and the context in which it's being used. But I cannot find anything concrete in law and was wondering if anyone might be able to shed a little light.
One of the girls featured, prompted by her mother, has mounted her high-horse and is threatening all manner of legal action for breech of privacy and the like. The back story to this is that her mother was previously the clerk of the Parish Council and left a year ago under a bit of a cloud and has made it her business since to do all she can to disrupt what they do.
They've removed the photo from future publicity but has already appeared in the village newsletter. I'm 99% certain that there's no legal issue given the length of time between the photo being taken and used, the fact that the identity of the children are masked by virtue of face paint (I thought the girl in question was in fact my niece!!) and the context in which it's being used. But I cannot find anything concrete in law and was wondering if anyone might be able to shed a little light.
Mr Pointy said:
Is it the case that the photo was used while the mother was in her previous position on the Parish Council & that she knew it was being used?
What is she actually going to sue for?
That remains to be seen. She has mentioned reporting the matter to the ICO and the seeking of damages. What is she actually going to sue for?
The other kids that feature all found it at hoot that we used the photos.
Her mother was the Clerk back on 2006. If she was still the Clerk, there wouldn't be any issue.
Village life, eh?
Did you have permission to take the photo?
Is the child featured or in the background? Did you get model releases at the original event or were people warned that photography for public use was taking place & had the opportunity to consent by attendance?
Who owns the copyright?
Despite these questions it's the Parish Council's decision to publicise the event in this way that's the issue, not a photo you took 16 years ago. If you want to stew her beak if she's threatened making it a safeguarding issue, a strongly worded solicitor's letter reminding her of the risk she runs in attacking your reputation in this way might be worth a few bob.
Is the child featured or in the background? Did you get model releases at the original event or were people warned that photography for public use was taking place & had the opportunity to consent by attendance?
Who owns the copyright?
Despite these questions it's the Parish Council's decision to publicise the event in this way that's the issue, not a photo you took 16 years ago. If you want to stew her beak if she's threatened making it a safeguarding issue, a strongly worded solicitor's letter reminding her of the risk she runs in attacking your reputation in this way might be worth a few bob.
Collectingbrass said:
Did you have permission to take the photo?
Is the child featured or in the background? Did you get model releases at the original event or were people warned that photography for public use was taking place & had the opportunity to consent by attendance?
It was a community event that I and others took photos at. It wasn’t a commercial gig; just families, mates and neighbours having a bit of fun in a park. Because I’m the resident pro-snapper in the village, my shots tend to get used on Parish Council and Community promos. Is the child featured or in the background? Did you get model releases at the original event or were people warned that photography for public use was taking place & had the opportunity to consent by attendance?
The photos weren’t taken with the intent that they would be used from promoting similar events – just a case of having two that fitted the bill being used now.
Collectingbrass said:
Who owns the copyright?
Me.Collectingbrass said:
Despite these questions it's the Parish Council's decision to publicise the event in this way that's the issue, not a photo you took 16 years ago.
This is correct. My enquiry here is to help them fend off the issue. One of our good friends is a Parish Councillor and this woman and her daughter’s approach has affected her quite badly, to the point of her resigning from the PC. StevieBee said:
Mr Pointy said:
Is it the case that the photo was used while the mother was in her previous position on the Parish Council & that she knew it was being used?
What is she actually going to sue for?
That remains to be seen. She has mentioned reporting the matter to the ICO and the seeking of damages. What is she actually going to sue for?
The other kids that feature all found it at hoot that we used the photos.
Her mother was the Clerk back on 2006. If she was still the Clerk, there wouldn't be any issue.
Village life, eh?
bigandclever said:
I can't work out what the safeguarding issue is.
There isn’t one and nor is there a need to ask for permission. There is no case to answer so I’d just ignore it as there isn’t anything for her to take legal action for.Edited by craig1912 on Wednesday 29th March 10:49
Apologies, I have no expert advice to extol, however, some people really are t
ts with nothing better to do than try to upset others.
I help organise a few things locally and manage a kids football team and stuff like this makes me wonder why we all do it. People put hours and hours of their own free time into bettering the society they live in, only for idiots trying to ruin it for everyone else. It's a 16 year old photo, I doubt anyone even knows it's her.
I took part in a national sporting event in 2014 and bizarrely a close-up photo of me has been used thereafter on their national marketing campaign. I look terrible, but I guess they're trying to show that even overweight middle aged people can compete - I absolutely love it and wouldn't dream of complaining, although no doubt I signed a waiver when I signed up.
Best of luck fighting it and I hope someone on here more knowledgeable than me can help you.
ts with nothing better to do than try to upset others. I help organise a few things locally and manage a kids football team and stuff like this makes me wonder why we all do it. People put hours and hours of their own free time into bettering the society they live in, only for idiots trying to ruin it for everyone else. It's a 16 year old photo, I doubt anyone even knows it's her.
I took part in a national sporting event in 2014 and bizarrely a close-up photo of me has been used thereafter on their national marketing campaign. I look terrible, but I guess they're trying to show that even overweight middle aged people can compete - I absolutely love it and wouldn't dream of complaining, although no doubt I signed a waiver when I signed up.
Best of luck fighting it and I hope someone on here more knowledgeable than me can help you.
IANAL.. just my 2ps worth....
There is no issue with the photo itself, its 100% legal.
However, as the image has been used on a poster which is advertising material, its possible someone could argue this is for commercial advertising use and would possibly be a civil case.
IF it was deemed to be commercial use (grey area due to being for a local parish) then you would need to get permission first, in most cases.
You would however need a court to decide if its commercial use or not. Then if it was, decide a sum of compo which would given the limited nature of the publication and the fact its only been produced in limited numbers would be about 10 quid. If that.
Given it would cost thousands to take it to court then you (or more likely the body / person who used the image commercially) are probably safe.
All IMHO.
There is no issue with the photo itself, its 100% legal.
However, as the image has been used on a poster which is advertising material, its possible someone could argue this is for commercial advertising use and would possibly be a civil case.
IF it was deemed to be commercial use (grey area due to being for a local parish) then you would need to get permission first, in most cases.
You would however need a court to decide if its commercial use or not. Then if it was, decide a sum of compo which would given the limited nature of the publication and the fact its only been produced in limited numbers would be about 10 quid. If that.
Given it would cost thousands to take it to court then you (or more likely the body / person who used the image commercially) are probably safe.
All IMHO.
Thanks so much for your inputs chaps. Many of the replies has enabled me to refine my searching which has concluded that:
By law, a photographer may take a photo of anyone of any age from and in any public space and that photograph may be published in any legal context. The exception is for commercial activity. There is no legal requirement to obtain the person's permission unless for the aforementioned commercial use.
Child Safeguarding legislation protects those under 18 from predatory conduct. Whilst there is no law to prevent photographs being taken of those under 18, Safeguarding Legislation can intervene where there exists the threat or existence of nefarious intent towards Children.
Release forms and the various restrictions that you find at kids football matches and school plays are 'best practice' rather than absolute law.
The only grounds someone can legally force the withdrawal of an image is if that person has a legal right to anonymity, which unless this girl was Mi5's youngest operative, I doubt would apply, or there is evidence that the image is causing the person mental distress.
Thanks again. I'll let you know any development of interest!
By law, a photographer may take a photo of anyone of any age from and in any public space and that photograph may be published in any legal context. The exception is for commercial activity. There is no legal requirement to obtain the person's permission unless for the aforementioned commercial use.
Child Safeguarding legislation protects those under 18 from predatory conduct. Whilst there is no law to prevent photographs being taken of those under 18, Safeguarding Legislation can intervene where there exists the threat or existence of nefarious intent towards Children.
Release forms and the various restrictions that you find at kids football matches and school plays are 'best practice' rather than absolute law.
The only grounds someone can legally force the withdrawal of an image is if that person has a legal right to anonymity, which unless this girl was Mi5's youngest operative, I doubt would apply, or there is evidence that the image is causing the person mental distress.
Thanks again. I'll let you know any development of interest!
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff