uplyme.com Forum Index uplyme.com
The Uplyme Debate
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Mrs Ethelston's

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    uplyme.com Forum Index -> Community
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
truthinadvertising



Joined: 25 Jun 2007

Posts: 17

PostPosted: 25/06/09, 08:11    Post subject: Mrs Ethelston's Reply with quote

What do other villagers think of the notoriety earned and the laughing stock that the school has become due to the ridiculous political correctness that led to the banning of wholesome photography on Sports day? I write as one whose family has attended the school over four generations and feel that Mrs Ethelston must be turning in her grave and that those responsible should be named and shamed.
_________________
You'll grow old too -- if you're lucky!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
administrator
Site Admin


Joined: 14 Sep 2005

Posts: 54
Location: Lyme Rd, Uplyme.

PostPosted: 30/06/09, 13:15    Post subject: Public place = public domain Reply with quote

Whilst, I understand that the school is quite within its rights to control what is photographed within its own private premises, I don't understand what authority it claims to prevent photography (or filming, or anything else legal) in a public place such as the village playing field.

If a small minority of parents prefer that their children should not be photographed then perhaps they should ask the school to exclude them from public events. How very sad that would be.

Perhaps a lawyer reading might provide a more authoritative ruling on the laws relating to 'public domain' ?

Admin.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
douglagh



Joined: 13 Sep 2006

Posts: 13
Location: Springhead Rd. Uplyme

PostPosted: 01/07/09, 16:40    Post subject: Nanny state Reply with quote

I cannot understand why what I presume is a minority are allowed to destroy a tradition for normal (proud) parents to take pictures of their kids on a sports day. Why was this proposal not voted down? If you analyse this rationally, given that the venue is a sports field, the chance of any of the photos being useful for anything other than exactly what they were intended for is daft in the extreme. The overriding reason seems to be "just in case" we had better ban it. Very sad.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Driver



Joined: 24 Aug 2008

Posts: 106
Location: Uplyme

PostPosted: 02/07/09, 08:02    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's not just school's below is what the MSA (Motor Sports Association) give as guidelines for race meetings:-

"There is evidence that some people have used sporting events as an opportunity to take inappropriate photographs or film footage of young and disabled sportspeople in vulnerable positions. It is advisable that all sporting organisations adhere to the appropriate guidelines given below:

Students or amateur photographers/film/video operators wishing to record the event should seek accreditation with the event organiser by producing their student club or registration card and a letter from their club/educational establishment outlining their motive for attending the event.

All other spectators wishing to use photographic/film/video equipment with a telescopic or zoom lens should register their intent with the promoter of the event.

Accreditation procedure : a system should be adopted whereby a record should be made of the individual's name and address and club. Professionals should register prior to the event and their identification details should be checked with the issuing authority prior to the event. On registering, promoters of events should consider issuing an identification label on the day, which can serve to highlight those who have accreditation but must ensure that where regular events occur, the identifying label is changed to prevent unofficial replication.

Public information : the specific details concerning photographic/video and filming equipment should, where possible, be published prominently in event programmes and must be announced over the public address system prior to the start of the event.

The recommended wording is :

In line with the recommendation in the Organisation's Child Protection Policy, the promoters of this event request that any person wishing to engage in any video, zoom or close range photography should register their details with staff at the spectator entry desk before carrying out any such photography. The promoter reserves the right of entry to this event and reserves the right to decline entry to any person unable to meet or abide by the promoter's conditions.

If you have concerns : if you are concerned about any photography taking place at an event, contact the promoter or event organiser and discuss it with them. If appropriate the person about whom there are concerns should be asked to leave and the facility managers should be informed.

Videoing as a coaching aid : there is no intention to prevent club coaches, instructors and teachers using video equipment as a legitimate coaching aid. However, performers and their parents/carers should be aware that this is part of the coaching programme and care should be taken in the storing of such films."

This is just a small part of the "rules" we work under as "pro snappers" at sports events

And for the right to use an image then the real trouble starts

A model release, known in similar contexts as a liability waiver, is a legal release typically signed by the subject of a photograph granting permission to publish the photograph in one form or another. The legal rights of the signatories in reference to the material is thereafter subject to the allowances and restrictions stated in the release, and also possibly in exchange for compensation paid to the photographed.
Publishing an identifiable photo of a person without a model release signed by that person can result in civil liability for whoever publishes the photograph.

Note that the photographer is typically not the publisher of the photograph, but sells the photograph to someone else to publish. Liability rests solely with the publisher, except under special conditions. It is typical for the photographer to obtain the model release because he is merely present at the time and can get it, but also because it gives him more opportunity to sell the photograph later to a party who wishes to publish it. Unless a photo is actually published, the need (or use) of a model release is undefined. And, since some forms of publication do not require a model release (e.g., news articles), the existence (or non-existence) of a release is irrelevant.

Note that the issue of model release forms and liability waivers is a legal area related to privacy and is separate from copyright. Also, the need for model releases pertains to public use of the photos: i.e., publishing them, commercially or not. The act of taking a photo of someone in a public setting without a model release, or of viewing or non-commercially showing such a photo in private, generally does not create legal exposure.
The legal issues surrounding model releases are complex and vary by jurisdiction. Although the risk to photographers is virtually nil (so long as proper disclosures of the existence of a release, and its content is made to whoever licenses the photo for publication), the business need for having releases rises substantially if the main source of income from the photographer's work lies within industries that would require them (such as advertising). In short, photo journalists never need to obtain model releases for images they shoot for (or sell to) news or qualified editorial publications.

Photographers who also publish images need releases to protect themselves, but there is a distinction between making an image available for sale (even via a website), which is not considered publication in a form that would require a release, and the use of the same image to promote a product or service in a way that would require a release. Whether or not publishing a photo via the internet requires a release is currently being debated in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. It is likely that any and all exposure to the public of unreleased photos via any vehicle will constitute civil liability for the photographer.
Regardless of legal issues, taking someone's picture without his/her permission may be considered impolite and may provoke a hostile response, so the photographer should take such matters into consideration and ask permission if appropriate
Adult Release: This is the form most commonly referred to as a "model release". The language of this release is intended for use by models over the age of 18 (the age of majority)
Minor Release: This variant of the model release contains language referring to the model (who is a minor) in the third-person, and required signature by a parent or other legal guardian of the model. A release which is not signed by a parent or guardian affords no legal protection to the publisher.
Group Release: This is a modified version of the Adult Release which includes additional signature lines to accommodate use by multiple models or subjects in a single image.

This is what's required if I use any image for commericial use not media use
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
douglagh



Joined: 13 Sep 2006

Posts: 13
Location: Springhead Rd. Uplyme

PostPosted: 04/07/09, 16:37    Post subject: Nanny state Reply with quote

Ok, I understand the need for guidelines in a wider range of sporting venues where pro-photographers have a legitimate reason to be present and working.

This is a small school sports day. Seems to be common sense has been replaced with an over the top ban. How about a circular to all parents to keep an eye open for photographers they could not identify, and a voluntary and friendly code circulated to all parents to gently challenge anyone they could not recognise. I am mindful that most parents will at least be able to recognise most of the people there. Is it that difficult to spot a person who clearly does not seem to be connected to the child being snapped? I for one would not object to an appropriate challenge from a parent, so I could point out my child/grandchild. In fact I would see that as an appropriate safeguard for the event in question.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Driver



Joined: 24 Aug 2008

Posts: 106
Location: Uplyme

PostPosted: 05/07/09, 20:09    Post subject: Reply with quote

This issue is part of the script in ITV's Kingdom tonight
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
geoff



Joined: 17 Sep 2005

Posts: 704
Location: Lyme Rd, Uplyme

PostPosted: 06/07/09, 10:53    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's interesting Driver, but as far as I can tell, those guidelines only refer to shooting in a private place such as school grounds etc. In such circumstances presumably you could be reasonably asked to leave if you do not recognise the organisation's photography policies.

But what's the case if you are in a public place (such as the Uplyme Playing field) ? I can't imagine what legal right a school would have to enforce it's own internal policies on members of public in a public place ?

G
_________________
it's never too late
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Gilly



Joined: 04 Jul 2006

Posts: 54
Location: Axminster

PostPosted: 11/07/09, 00:58    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do any of you work in a Primary School setting?

And the last time I looked, the school was graded outstanding in some areas... let's not get carried away with "laughing stock".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Martyn



Joined: 28 Mar 2008

Posts: 86

PostPosted: 20/08/09, 10:56    Post subject: Mrs Ethelston's Reply with quote

I've recently argued with my wife about the road sign opposite Mrs Ethelston's school (is it called Ethelston's Close?).
I said it's wrong to teach kids to accept appalling grammer by having a road sign without an apostrophe; she said it does have an apostrophe.
I went to check and there are two signs; one with an apostrophe and one without!
Now maybe I'm mistaken (I was just driving past) and maybe the sign's just dirty or something, but if I'm right why on earth would a professional signwriter do this, and why would the local council (if it's the council that commissioned the signs) accept it?
There's a bloke who writes in the parish mag about grammer. Is he active on this forum?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gilly



Joined: 04 Jul 2006

Posts: 54
Location: Axminster

PostPosted: 20/08/09, 19:41    Post subject: Reply with quote

errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr............ are you being ironic? Is it not "grammar"?? methinks you might be throwing stones whilst sat in a glass house, there... Very Happy

And if you think ANY child of primary age has looked up and thought: "Well, look at the lack of a possessive apostrophe on that sign!"
on their way to or from school, then you need to learn a tad more about kids! Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Martyn



Joined: 28 Mar 2008

Posts: 86

PostPosted: 21/08/09, 07:38    Post subject: Mrs Ethelston's Reply with quote

And I read that post so carefully before I sent it because I thought 'if I make any mistakes here, somebody'll pick up on it'.

My bad spelling notwithstanding, don't you think it demonstrates poor standards, and our society's acceptance of them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
geoff



Joined: 17 Sep 2005

Posts: 704
Location: Lyme Rd, Uplyme

PostPosted: 31/08/09, 08:52    Post subject: Re: Mrs Ethelston's Reply with quote

I suppose it really depends on who gave their name to the close; was it Mrs. Ethelston, or was it perhaps the school at the end of the close - Mrs. Ethelston's ?

In the former case, the correct punctuation is without doubt Ethelston's Close, but in the unlikely second case, what would the appropriate punctuation be - perhaps Mrs.Ethelston's's ??? I don't think it would be Ethelstons' Close as that would imply something belonging to several Ethelstons, which is wrong.

I know such things may seem rather academic to many people, but in my opinion Martyn's point is well made. Too few people who you would expect to get it right (council signwriters for example) just don't bother to check. Incorrectly written signs then place doubt and ambiguity in the minds of those who read them, who will then perpetuate the error in anything they write and so on.

G.

Martyn wrote:
I've recently argued with my wife about the road sign opposite Mrs Ethelston's school (is it called Ethelston's Close?)...

_________________
it's never too late
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    uplyme.com Forum Index -> Community All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group