I'd imagine we'll be pretty safe as long as we don't accept seriously substandard photographs of celebrities, if it's similar in appearance and of reasonable quality compared with an official publicity photograph as appears on IMDb, their own website or their agents website. What we don't want is photographs taken on a mobile phone when someone is rushed to the hospital. We want free photos, but we don't want free photos likely to get us into a whole heap of trouble.
On 27/09/2007, Monahon, Peter B. Peter.Monahon@uspto.gov wrote:
...Doesn't even the US have restrictions on journalism?...
...A photograph of an individual in a public place is by definition not private information. What occurs in public is public...
Nobody understands the US.
The "US" is, literally "us", as in "we", as in "we, the people".
The "government has no powers of it's own except the powers it receives from "we the people".
And, "we, the people" put our concerns right up front in the Bill of Rights:
"...congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..."
Period. "...no law..." End of story.
...Perhaps something along the lines of proving that revealing information on a private figure is 'in the public interest'?..
Got that backwards - that's concerning "we the people", the public, having the right private information, not trying to make public information private!
And, what exactly is a "private figure" anyway?
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l