Pub Photography - A Risky Business?

[Conrad]

Out of interest, which bit of statute law allows you to refuse permission to take photographs of the outside of your premises? Indeed the implication is therefore that permission must be sought in the first place.

I don't know the actual facts of this, but I do know that you can get your pictures removed at request from Google Streetview, and as this has proved so popular in Germany Google are not bothering to send the cars round any more.

I am a strong believer in privacy, but it is a great pity to see people so concerned about stopping imagery of any building.

[AdrianPatrick]

Out of interest, which bit of statute law allows you to refuse permission to take photographs of the outside of your premises? Indeed the implication is therefore that permission must be sought in the first place.

Hi Nick,

Gosh I don't know much about the specifics, but I think most people are aware that indiviuals own the copyright to their own physical image. As far as I am aware the same is also true in this country for businesses and institutions; The business owner holds the copyright to the venue's physical image. While permission technically needs to be sought I doubt very much anyone would be prosecuted for photographing pubs!

I don't know much about the specific statute or case law, but I learned a little a few years ago when I began painting portraits of famous people. Artists do ocassionally get cease and desists.

My main point is simply that for any business which relies so heavily on promoting public awareness of its location and services, any objection would surely be misguided. Landlords and pub companies are my main clients and I spend a great deal of time pushing this very case.

[NickDavies]

http://www.sirimo.co.uk/2009/05/14/u...ers-rights-v2/ seems to be a pretty good account of things.

Copyright: Copyright applies to an photograph or other image of a person or object, not the person or object itself. The owner of the copyright is the owner of the picture, not the person or object depicted. It's what happens when you publish the picture that is the question.

[AdrianPatrick]

Yes that's generally the main application of copyright, but it does include the person or building aswell, even though I am sure I would have little success in persuing legal action if anyone took my photo! Since the face of a pub's building is a created object, that too would come under copyright.

But yes, unless you were using their image for commercial reasons I doubt there is a single thing legally that they could do about it. The legal right to protect their own image is really just there in principle.

But it is the reason why a lot of council webcams have been disabled in public places; people own the copyright to their own likeness just as McDonalds owns the copyright to their restaurant facias.

[Farway]

Sorry Adrain but you are completely wrong about people owning the copyrights to faces / buildings, they do not, the photogapher does

Providing the photographer is in a public place, like pavement opposite a pub, then taking photo is not against any law, plus some advice to plod who does not know the law from the Met
Members of the public and the media do not need a permit to film or photograph in public places and police have no power to stop them filming or photographing incidents or police personnel

Of course, as mentioned often on this thread, common sense must prevail, if you shove a zoom lens up someone nose then they have every right to object, or if you are threatened with a slapping then disist

But, to reiterate it is not illegal to take photos in public of anything visible from a public place [MoD / airports may invoke anti - terrorism, incorrectly]

[Farway]

But it is the reason why a lot of council webcams have been disabled in public places; people own the copyright to their own likeness just as McDonalds owns the copyright to their restaurant facias.

Again not true about copyright Adrian, the reason they have been disabled [apart from money] is Data Protection Act, if you have data on a person, as CCTV is classified, then the person has a legal right to see that data, ie look at footage. This has become a hornets nest for councils as often they just do not have the means comply, hence turn cameras off


PS, welcome to PuG Adrian, I and Nick are not having a go at you about copyright, honest, as you will find PuG is a friendly place occupied by normal reasonable folk, Having looked at your web site I realise how copyright is bit of a sore point with you

[AdrianPatrick]

Well I'm not a legal expert.

I'd just be polite and ask first if the landlord is about rather than argue the point with them. When I use a model, I have to obtain a release form from them which provides me with license to use their image. So although McDonalds will say they own their image, they probably mean you can photograph them from a public place, but would just have certain legal rights over the use of the image. Thanks for the link that helps!

I'm sure you are right.

[Farway]

pS added to my post after your reply

PS, welcome to PuG Adrian, I and Nick are not having a go at you about copyright, honest, as you will find PuG is a friendly place occupied by normal reasonable folk, Having looked at your web site I realise how copyright is bit of a sore point with you

[AdrianPatrick]

Again not true about copyright Adrian, the reason they have been disabled [apart from money] is Data Protection Act, if you have data on a person, as CCTV is classified, then the person has a legal right to see that data, ie look at footage. This has become a hornets nest for councils as often they just do not have the means comply, hence turn cameras off

That makes sense.

It was the CCTV webcam in Cleveleys that carried the copyright explanation. Data protection certainly seems a more legitimate reason.

[AdrianPatrick]

pS added to my post after your reply

PS, welcome to PuG Adrian, I and Nick are not having a go at you about copyright, honest, as you will find PuG is a friendly place occupied by normal reasonable folk, Having looked at your web site I realise how copyright is bit of a sore point with you

Sorry just seen this - no offence taken re copyright issues of course - And thanks for the welcome!