Interesting dilemma - so nudes from you ex. are not yours any more:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/22/revenge-porn-victims-boost-german-court-ruling
Where is the dilemma? It seems only enforceable if you display or publish them without permission, in which case you probably deserve whatever you get. I don't think there will be any mandatory hard-drive scans at divorce proceedings.
Where is the dilemma? It seems only enforceable if you display or publish them without permission, in which case you probably deserve whatever you get. I don't think there will be any mandatory hard-drive scans at divorce proceedings.
Nude photos taken without the victim's consent have always been illegal no matter yours or not.
I'm totally against this, it's idiotic.
If the woman didn't want images of her naked body to exist, then she shouldn't have allowed them to be taken, period. If she doesn't like it, then maybe she will learn not to do it in the future....
People want to take no responsibility for their own actions and their own mistakes and want to blame others.
Some of my best nude work have been intimate moments with my ex's... Of course I'm smart enough to obtain a model release, but still, they are my photos, period...
This kind of demand from the court would actually just make me lash out and post the images on the internet when I wasn't planning to... Don't mess with my photos, yes MY photos... And the government needs to stay out of MY personal business...
Good thing I'm not German...
I think if you have a model release, that's a different issue.
Legalities aside, the considerate thing to do is respect the wishes of the person depicted, whether you used to have sex with them or not. You also have responsibilities for your picture taking behavior, which ironically, you are saying should always be blamed on the other party. People change (at least some do); what they agree to willingly now may become an embarrassment or a humiliation or cause all sorts of personal problems later. Unless you have a release, that seems to trump the affront to your artistic sensibilities
I will stop posting, apparently my perspective isn't ok to share here because it is unpopular.
I will stop posting, apparently my perspective isn't ok to share here because it is unpopular.
I agree absolutely people have a responsibility to others...
There's are many models I don't display online because they have asked me to only include their work in published books, I respect that.
That said, I don't ALWAYS have a release, but do often if it's a long term thing and I'm shooting art content.
But the fact is, owning them and displaying them are different.
And I feel that I should not be told I can't own something once freely given because they changed their minds about it.
That's like saying if I had sex with someone, and then next week or next year they decided they didn't want to have sex with me, that they could have me charged with rape... I'm using this extreme to illustrate the point...
It's a slippery slope... Next the court will say I can't own photos of my ex in clothing because she doesn't want me to look at her anymore. Or that all family photographs with Aunt Judy in them need to be confiscated an destroyed because they are having a family fued...
It's ridiculous. You made your choices in the past, if you believe you made a mistake, learn from it and move on, but you can't change the past, and you shouldn't be able to take things away from people that were freely given.... Simply because you changed your mind later...
Its all about control. I think a better analogy to your rape analogy would be that the photographer would expect the subject to still have sex with them even though they have changed their mind. When you possess sexually explicit photos, you have control over the person. People change their minds. The agreement to take the photos involved two (or more) people, and one of them is now absent.
And the government needs to stay out of MY personal business...
Good thing I'm not German...
Stone:
If the photos were intended to be shared only between the photographer and the subject, that intention should be honoured.
The strange thing is that there is one movement into the direction of more protection of the "right of ones own image", and on the other side much more tolererated with taking and publishing as in the case of aerial photography (now Google and Bing, in future everybody).
In the US we bleat a lot about "freedom" but responsibility usually takes a hit. The "freedom" to post revenge photos of an ex is not freedom, it is chickenshit. In Europe they pay more attention to privacy issues than over the pond here. And, over here, your photos are not necessarily yours to do whatever you wish to do with them. It is like writing a letter. You send someone an intimate letter and they own the letter -- the physical paper and ink -- but you own the words. Some slimes recently tried to sell private Jackie Kennedy letters to a priest (she wrote about JFK fooling around with other women) at auction and got slapped down. We are real good over here at telling the world what to do but maybe we should look at our own sins of commission and omission once in a while. Just a thought. I know it is hard to run the most powerful empire the world has ever seen and still be thoughtful about silly things like privacy and rights but maybe we should.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?