On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 06:11:54AM +0000, knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote: > I didn't assume anything John, I was giving a worst case scenario, an extreme > example to prove my point, which was that there's a difference between > legally right (and wrong) and morally right (and wrong). I wasn't intentionally singling you out, Frank. You could have been the first poster to put "kiddy porn" into play, but there were several other later posts that took that possibility and ran with it.
> I wasn't making any connection between photographers who point their cameras > at children and pornographers. Hell I would guess I take as many photos of > children without the permission of their parents as anyone on this list. > > I guess that being the naive guy that I am I could not understand this parent > getting upset enough to contact Google if this was all innocent. > > I should have known better. > > Cheers, > frank Maybe you're lucky (or maybe you're a less conspicuous photographer than those of us who do less 'street' photography). I hardly ever take shots with identifiable members of the public in them, but several times I've had people object (although I've probably had about the same number ask me if I could send them a copy of the picture). Most of the time the objectors have been parents (except for the shop owner who thought I was photographing the front of her restaurant as a guide for terrorists, or something). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
