A Question on consent.

[nonen]

Apologies :- I think I posted this in the wrong section (Please could somebody move it / or delete it for me)

I wondered if there where any guidelines on posting pictures of other people on here. In most cases I would expect that you would need that persons explicit consent to post an image of them.

I was considering posting a picture I had captured from a youTube video. The video was played on the BBC news so I feel the image is very much in the public domain but I still feel uneasy about sharing it (So I won't). The image shows a woman taking part in a boxing day dip in a thong swim suit and a Santa hat. I felt it was a nice fun image that people on here might appreciate. I guess my reluctance in posting the image comes from the fact I do not know this woman. I do not know how she feels about having her buttocks exposed. I view her as a heroine for wearing a thong swimsuit to a public event. I sort of feel she probably wanted people to see her buttocks but I can't be sure.

I would like to know what people think about this, are there any rules relating to this ? or should we just use are own judgment and try to treat people with respect. Personally I quite like the way fetlife works. You have to click a check box every time you upload to say "I certify that everyone in the picture consented to have it uploaded to FetLife, that everyone was 18 or older when it was taken, and that I have documentation to support this." I think it gives a unequivocal statement that makes it very clear what is expected.

 

[RSTUK]

I think you did right. Legally there would be no issue but the moral stance you took, in my eyes, is good. This is because although she was happy to have her buttocks out on national tv. This was part of a light hearted jokey event and is probably the way she wanted to be taken. Posting to any sites no matter how supportive that can stray away from that would have possibly not been how she wanted to be perceived. She'd a done a brave thing and you gave made the decision not to twist that. So well done.

 

[ewitch]

Not talking about site rules here - there is always an element of the pratical with site rules but the moral side is actually complex.

Assuming image is already public (so no privacy or rights issues) - then conext is key. Some people will always argue you need consent for everything, but that is a bit of an oversimplifiation. There is a difference between taking a picture from a news article and making it into something to look at and taking a picture of someone modelling clothes and saying that is the dress I want to buy. For me the big question is are you taking something that wasn't sexual/objectifying and turning it into something that was. If it was already a sexual image before or isn't now (e.g. posting a clothing model in the context of I want to buy that dress) I think is fine.

In terms of non-public photos generally be a lot more cautious of peoples privacy. That being said the cases I think it is still fine is, using a photo in a context that would have been expected at the time it was taken (e.g. take a picture with friends on a night out and post to facebook), when there is no real loss of privacy (background people especailly where they are not identifiable or it was a public place to begin with). For something like this forum, assuming the photo is taken in private I would want it to be both minimal background and non identifiable (but I am not going to get upset that you caught someone elses elbow in the edge of the picture).

Other big group of exceptions is other legimitamate interest - but that tends to to be relevant here. Lets just say if you rob my house, I am not going to have any sympathy with the arguement that I don't have your concent to share your photo.

 

[Inkwarden]

Apologies :- I think I posted this in the wrong section (Please could somebody move it / or delete it for me)

I wondered if there where any guidelines on posting pictures of other people on here. In most cases I would expect that you would need that persons explicit consent to post an image of them.

I was considering posting a picture I had captured from a youTube video. The video was played on the BBC news so I feel the image is very much in the public domain but I still feel uneasy about sharing it (So I won't). The image shows a woman taking part in a boxing day dip in a thong swim suit and a Santa hat. I felt it was a nice fun image that people on here might appreciate. I guess my reluctance in posting the image comes from the fact I do not know this woman. I do not know how she feels about having her buttocks exposed. I view her as a heroine for wearing a thong swimsuit to a public event. I sort of feel she probably wanted people to see her buttocks but I can't be sure.

I would like to know what people think about this, are there any rules relating to this ? or should we just use are own judgment and try to treat people with respect. Personally I quite like the way fetlife works. You have to click a check box every time you upload to say "I certify that everyone in the picture consented to have it uploaded to FetLife, that everyone was 18 or older when it was taken, and that I have documentation to support this." I think it gives a unequivocal statement that makes it very clear what is expected.

This is a fine spot for this post.

Note about consent: Consent is extremely important. We should all know this especially anyone engaging in any kink activities. That being said in this scenario I understand why there could be some confusion. If you want to post a picture of someone who is not you, YOU MUST have their express written consent. I know it's a public video on youtube but keep in mind where you would be posting it. So although you are more than welcome to link someone to the youtube video posting their photo without consent is a no go.

 

[nonen]

Many thanks @Inkwarden, and thank you everybody who has responded to my post. I am glad that people think I made the right decision on this occasion.

After making the post I realized I could be accused of being hypocritical as I have in the past posted an image from a TV program on another site (not getdare). It was something I did 5 years ago, and it only did it on one occasion. I guess maybe my views on the right way to behave have changed since then.

There is still something about unintended/unexpected exposure of underwear that hugely excites me. I enjoy being able to share this kink with other people, and like sites like this that enable me to do so in a more respectful manner.

 

[deschut]

I think it makes a lot of sense, linking would be a referral to already public information - and the main/primary source, which is ok. But then copying without a clear consent would kind of push that boundary.

Thanks for the clarification though - and for the question! I think it does help making it clear like this

 

[DasPuppy]

Just because something is out in public, doesn't mean you have the right to copy it and post it as you please.

There is the copyright of the person who made the thing (photographer in this case). They _should_ get payed by whoever is showing their image. Then there's the right of the person/people in a work. They also have the right to limit their exposure in other places.

Just because there's a poster of something, you don't have the right to take a picture and put the picture of that anywhere you please.

This ONLY applies for certain licenses. For example if you know, and can backup, that a certain work is under a certain license. See "copyleft", or CC, and similar.
It also varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Just because sth is in the public domain in the US, doesn't mean it also is in CA or EU, or other places of the world.

In short:
If you don't know the license, you're most likely not allowed to just copy paste something somewhere else.

That's where the AI-discussion comes in. That stuff has no person associated with its creation, so you _can_ distribute as you please. No rights holder. But if the work is based on AI, but enough "creative juice" has been put into the final result by a human, it might again fall under copyright. This also is interpreted differently per court, per country/state/region as to what would constitute to be "enough" creativity.

Another example is music:
The composition might be 100+ years old, and not have copyright anymore. But the orchestra playing it does!

All of that comes into play before you even think about consent of the person depicted. Within EU/Germany for example, everbody has a "right to their own likeness". The media creator usually needs to be the one, to have documented the consent of all people depicted.

Only very few situations can override that in some jurisdictions, like overwhelming public interest (not as in we want this, but as in the public needs to know).

Things to look up for your own in depth research:
creative commons (cc)
copyleft
public domain
copyright

 

[Manarus]

I'm a bit on a hurry so sorry if I repeat sb else, but:

You could share the video link and state the minute and second at which the picture is available. That should be the safest way regardless (And its also not too hard to follow the link, youtube even lets you do a timestamp in the links)

 

[fieldman]

Context is everything. It's one thing to have a cheeky outfit on TV. Quite another to have a revealing still from that footage captured and posted on a sex themed website. I'd say leave it out, personally.