Mike Ganz
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.4 #7 · Had The Sheriff Called On Me | |
nanscombe wrote:
Hi All,
Ok, it might have been "blown out of proportion" and yes, the OP was only slightly inconvenienced. But surely he still has the right to feel annoyed by the situation?
It may not be fashionable at the moment, and other people may consider it anti-social, but I still reserve the right to feel annoyed if things like this happen to me.
Regards
Nigel
I don't think he should have been annoyed...well, maybe a little, but at the same time a bit more "understanding" of the situation?
Take another example (something similar to the OP's situation, but with different subject matter): You just receive a new lens, and you decide to take it to the neighborhood park to test it out. As far as you know, the park is public property and you have every right to be there, which is correct. You stop by the swingsets, etc,. and begin taking pictures of the kids playing on the swings. An observant parent sees you and notices that you don't appear to have any of your own children with you, but you're taking pictures of the children nonetheless. She doesn't realize that your intentions are purely innocent, gets a little worried, and decides to call the police on her cell phone to report that a man without any children in the area is taking pics of her kids with a really long lens. The police come by, ask you what you're doing, etc. The aggrieved parent then asks that you delete any pictures from the camera that may have her child in it. What do you do? After all, you're on public property and (supposedly) people out in public don't have a right to privacy. The choices:
a.) take out a copy of a photographer's bill of rights and state your case
b.) remind the police that you are on public property and the children are out in the open, keep the pics
c.) honor the mother's request, delete the pics, and move on
Myself? I'd choose Option C. Just for the fact that it wouldn't be worth it to push the issue. PITA? Yeah maybe, but in today's weird litigious climate we need to pick our battles very carefully (especially in an example like this when children are involved). Who needs a scene with an hysterical parent or two or three (and the police).
Not sure if this is a good example of the point that I'm trying to make, but I just wanted to show that even though you'd be on public property and well within your rights to probably choose Option B, the "inconvenience" factor can easily escalate depending on the situation. In the OP's, the old lady wasn't present for the discussion. In the example that I used, you're now in the middle of it with an irate parent or two that will definitely not see things your way. Nowadays, everyone's a suspect. Sad that its gotten that way.
Regards.
Edited on Feb 12, 2008 at 06:54 PM
|
Seems like common sense prevailed, with a "no harm, no foul" outcome. To be honest, I don't really see a problem in this instance whatsoever. This guy Krages must get a royalty every time his name or white paper gets mentioned in an on-line thread. Sheesh. 