odille, you surely mean that it's not a public place. Just because public are in it does not mean it's public
I assume the club is prvately owned, that there may be a cost to enter and almost certainly there are conditions of entry
odille, you surely mean that it's not a public place. Just because public are in it does not mean it's public
I assume the club is prvately owned, that there may be a cost to enter and almost certainly there are conditions of entry
Darren
Gear : Nikon Goodness
Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
Please support Precious Hearts
Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated
Ah, yes, but I would not want to test this in Court. The facebook page would at the least have the venue's name and most likely have lists of up-coming events etc. A court could easily see the facebook page as advertising. I would. Facebook to me is just a viral marketing technique disguised as social networking.
"It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro
Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
Nikon, etc!
RICK
My Photography
It's highly unlikely this will be tested in court anytime soon, just too expensive for either party, in the meanwhile laissez faire
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
OK - first to be specific, this is not a public place.
Public have access to it. But its privately owned.
If I were the manager/owner of the hotel, I would just for additional protection, add into their terms and conditions of entry to their establishment (yep they would have T&C as well ! ), that as part of the their entry conditions that photography does take place as is posted to their FB page.
However, saying that, I for one would not really be too impressed to have (isnt this ironic !), to have a photograph taken if I did not want it taken, and I cant imagine a bigger disincentive to visit this particular hotel - sorry have to give you some honest feedback here.
Its one thing to walk around and ask if people want their picture taken within an entertainment establishment, and quite another to do it without asking. No offence meant at your entrepreneurial spirit, but I do consider that to be a tad off Sorry.
I imagine you would have no more liability that a newspaper would have for publishing photos of a news event; after all, you are simply publishing a form of photo journal. As long as the image in question is not used for commerical advantage (by the way, that still entitles you to charge for the image - ie the media - but not claim that person x endorses something), you will be good.
The night-club manager on the other hand may be dirty on you if customers feel worried that their private affairs are being made public - as customers would aviod the place.
Scotty
Canon 7D : Canon EF 70-200mm f:2.8 L IS II USM - Canon EF 24-105 f:4 L IS USM - Canon EF 50mm f:1.8 - Canon EF-s 18-55mm f:3.5-5.6
Sigma APO 150-500mm f:5-6.3 DG OS HSM - Sigma 10-20mm f:3.5 EX DC HSM
Speedlite 580 EX II - Nissin Di866 II - Yongnuo 460-II x2 - Kenko extension tube set - Canon Extender EF 1.4x II
Manfroto monopod - SILK 700DX Pro tripod - Remote release - Cokin Z-Pro filter box + Various filters
Current Social Experiment: CAPRIL - Wearing a cape for the month of April to support Beyond Blue
Visit me on Flickr