[UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Kyle Cassidy]

Ross pretty much had it down in his review.

I was photo-documenting the whole thing for those of you affeared of
traveling SOBA after dark and after I'd taken about ... six photos a
woman in a yellow "Philadelphia Orchestra" t-shirt came over to me and
told me that "photographs of the orchestra cannot appear on a website"
(I kid you not) -- which I took for a moment to be some sort of vampire
thing -- like, they just wouldn't show up on film so I was wasting my
time pressing the shutter button, but then I realized she meant that she
was telling me I wasn't _allowed_ to show anybody photographs of the
orchestra -- which surprised me, it being a public event, outdoors, to
which the media had been invited. But, nonetheless, I have adhered to
her request as best I can. And now provide the weak and infirm on this
list the virtual Orchestra in Clark Park experience:

The crowd pretty much filled the bowl. We could have ended west philly
gentrification in one fell swoop by opening up a few cans of mustard gas
down there. There were so many fancy folding chairs and enviornmentally
sound biodegradable snack-food wrappers being thoughtfully packed out in
trendy picnic baskets made of recycled soda bottles I thought Dennis
Kucinich was going to show up handing out vegan hot dogs:

http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/orchestra1.jpg


The view to the stage:

http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/orchestra2.jpg


The conductor, who may or may not be Rossen Milanov, worked it for all
he was worth:

http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/orchestra3.jpg


And attracted some auxiliary conductors who had more energy and an
amazing attention span:

http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/orchestra4.jpg


Much of the performance was more of a "Symphony for Orchestra, Crying
Babies, and Drum Circle." One highlight of the evening was when the
general din was agumented by a helecopter circling overhead during
Bolero. I thought it was news people, but upon closer inspection it
turned out to be philly PD snipers taking out a couple of off-leash
dogs:

http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/orchestra5.jpg


There you have it. Just like you were there.


Hopefully shakespeare's estate will allow photography during Romeo and
Juliet when it plays in the park.

kc


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Shawn Medero]

On 7/23/07, Kyle Cassidy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Much of the performance was more of a "Symphony for Orchestra, Crying
Babies, and Drum Circle." One highlight of the evening was when the
general din was agumented by a helecopter circling overhead during
Bolero. I thought it was news people, but upon closer inspection it
turned out to be philly PD snipers taking out a couple of off-leash
dogs:

http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/orchestra5.jpg


Since so many of the people there appeared to be not from West
Philadelphia at all... I thought it was fitting that they were able to
experience the nightly occurrence of the Philadelphia Police
Helicopter demonstration. (Though it was still light out and they were
unable to witness the "precision illumination" demo.)



Also a huge WTF to not being able to post pictures on a website. For
the record you could have posted the pictures as-is... you provided a
URL to an image resource over an email list... but you didn't create a
special HTML page for demonstrating the pictures or upload them to
Flickr/MySpace/etc. (A domain name hosting multiple image resources
hardly seems like it constitutes a website.)

-s

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Kyle Cassidy]

I'm not a lawyer, but I suspect that those on the list would have given
a hearty "ho ho ho" if told they couldn't take pictures of a newsworthy
event in public and might even cite Showler v. Harper's Magazine
Foundation. 

I might take to wearing a sign in public that says "Images of me may not
appear on websites."

kc

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shawn Medero

>Also a huge WTF to not being able to post pictures on a website. For
the record you 
>could have posted the pictures as-is... you provided a URL to an image
resource over 
>an email list... but you didn't create a special HTML page for
demonstrating the pictures 
>or upload them to Flickr/MySpace/etc. (A domain name hosting multiple
image resources 
>hardly seems like it constitutes a website.)


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Shawn Medero]

On 7/23/07, Kyle Cassidy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


I might take to wearing a sign in public that says "Images of me may not
appear on websites."


I've wanted to make a shirt that had some catchy internet meme on it
like "IM IN UR PHOTOZ STEALIN UR MEMORIEZ" and then spend my weekends
at popular tourist destinations. Every time I think to pull out the
old iron-on t-shirt transfer kit another leak appears in my bedroom
and my nearly one year old son throws his food at me.

-s

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[B Andersen]

There is no reason i know of that you can't have taken photos of the
orchestra. I think you should post them to wikipedia and this page in
particular:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_Orchestra

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rossen_Milanov


On 7/23/07, Kyle Cassidy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Ross pretty much had it down in his review.

I was photo-documenting the whole thing for those of you affeared of
traveling SOBA after dark and after I'd taken about ... six photos a
woman in a yellow "Philadelphia Orchestra" t-shirt came over to me and
told me that "photographs of the orchestra cannot appear on a website"
(I kid you not) -- which I took for a moment to be some sort of vampire
thing -- like, they just wouldn't show up on film so I was wasting my
time pressing the shutter button, but then I realized she meant that she
was telling me I wasn't _allowed_ to show anybody photographs of the
orchestra -- which surprised me, it being a public event, outdoors, to
which the media had been invited. But, nonetheless, I have adhered to
her request as best I can. And now provide the weak and infirm on this
list the virtual Orchestra in Clark Park experience:

The crowd pretty much filled the bowl. We could have ended west philly
gentrification in one fell swoop by opening up a few cans of mustard gas
down there. There were so many fancy folding chairs and enviornmentally
sound biodegradable snack-food wrappers being thoughtfully packed out in
trendy picnic baskets made of recycled soda bottles I thought Dennis
Kucinich was going to show up handing out vegan hot dogs:

http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/orchestra1.jpg


The view to the stage:

http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/orchestra2.jpg


The conductor, who may or may not be Rossen Milanov, worked it for all
he was worth:

http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/orchestra3.jpg


And attracted some auxiliary conductors who had more energy and an
amazing attention span:

http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/orchestra4.jpg


Much of the performance was more of a "Symphony for Orchestra, Crying
Babies, and Drum Circle." One highlight of the evening was when the
general din was agumented by a helecopter circling overhead during
Bolero. I thought it was news people, but upon closer inspection it
turned out to be philly PD snipers taking out a couple of off-leash
dogs:

http://www.kylecassidy.com/temp/orchestra5.jpg


There you have it. Just like you were there.


Hopefully shakespeare's estate will allow photography during Romeo and
Juliet when it plays in the park.

kc


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Brian Siano]

Kyle Cassidy wrote:

Ross pretty much had it down in his review.

I was photo-documenting the whole thing for those of you affeared of
traveling SOBA after dark and after I'd taken about ... six photos a
woman in a yellow "Philadelphia Orchestra" t-shirt came over to me and
told me that "photographs of the orchestra cannot appear on a website"
(I kid you not) -- which I took for a moment to be some sort of vampire
thing -- like, they just wouldn't show up on film so I was wasting my
time pressing the shutter button, but then I realized she meant that she
was telling me I wasn't _allowed_ to show anybody photographs of the
orchestra -- which surprised me, it being a public event, outdoors, to
which the media had been invited. 
I ran into this same person while running around the park myself. She 
asked me if the photos were for a commercial purpose. I just shrugged 
and said "Dunno." I moved on, she follows me and asks me something I 
didn't quite catch, so I said, "Look, I'm with the friends of Clark 
Park, it's for our newsletter."


"Why didn't you answer my question then?"

"I didn't think it was worth answering."

Anyway, two of the photos are on the FoCP website, 
http://www.clarkpark.info. I'm rejiggifigorifying the website, so maybe 
more shall appear.


Oh, and the Dickens people ought to check it out, too.


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[David Toccafondi]

Kyle, that's freaking crazy and the Philadelphia Orchestra should be
ashamed!  If someone came up to me and told me that, I can promise you those
photos would be on every website I could get access to.  There is no legal
reason preventing you from putting those photos online.  Nobody there had
anything remotely close to a reasonable expectation of privacy, the photos
are not portraying anyone in a false or even a negative light, and you're
not using them to promote a product.  If you don't want to risk posting the
un-censored photos, I'll be more than glad to put them on my website for you
so u can link to them.

dave


On 7/23/07, Kyle Cassidy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Ross pretty much had it down in his review.

I was photo-documenting the whole thing for those of you affeared of
traveling SOBA after dark and after I'd taken about ... six photos a
woman in a yellow "Philadelphia Orchestra" t-shirt came over to me and
told me that "photographs of the orchestra cannot appear on a website"
(I kid you not) -- which I took for a moment to be some sort of vampire
thing -- like, they just wouldn't show up on film so I was wasting my
time pressing the shutter button, but then I realized she meant that she
was telling me I wasn't _allowed_ to show anybody photographs of the
orchestra -- which surprised me, it being a public event, outdoors, to
which the media had been invited. But, nonetheless, I have adhered to
her request as best I can.

RE: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Kyle Cassidy]

i'm not worried about getting sued -- i just thought it would be funnier
to scratch out their faces. I'm kind of turned off to the orchestra
after this silliness.

I wonder if they wear Mexican wrestling masks when they go to the
grocery store to preserve their anonymity.





From: David Toccafondi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 6:06 PM
To: Kyle Cassidy
Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park



Kyle, that's freaking crazy and the Philadelphia Orchestra should be
ashamed!  If someone came up to me and told me that, I can promise you
those photos would be on every website I could get access to.  There is
no legal reason preventing you from putting those photos online.  Nobody
there had anything remotely close to a reasonable expectation of
privacy, the photos are not portraying anyone in a false or even a
negative light, and you're not using them to promote a product.  If you
don't want to risk posting the un-censored photos, I'll be more than
glad to put them on my website for you so u can link to them.

dave



On 7/23/07, Kyle Cassidy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Ross pretty much had it down in his review.
   
I was photo-documenting the whole thing for those of you
affeared of
traveling SOBA after dark and after I'd taken about ... six
photos a
woman in a yellow "Philadelphia Orchestra" t-shirt came over to
me and
told me that "photographs of the orchestra cannot appear on a
website"
(I kid you not) -- which I took for a moment to be some sort of
vampire
thing -- like, they just wouldn't show up on film so I was
wasting my
time pressing the shutter button, but then I realized she meant
that she
was telling me I wasn't _allowed_ to show anybody photographs of
the
orchestra -- which surprised me, it being a public event,
outdoors, to
which the media had been invited. But, nonetheless, I have
adhered to
her request as best I can.
   






You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Krfapt]

 
In a message dated 7/23/2007 6:08:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

the  Philadelphia Orchestra should be ashamed


The orchestra and its second-string (good enough for the bumpkins)  conductor 
only got $80,000 to oom-pah in the specially-seeded Clark  Park bowl. So they 
obviously made a big sacrifice to grace our little  community and should at 
least have exclusive rights to audio and visual  records of their having been 
there.
 
After all, if you were the great Philadelphia Orchestra -- and had to  stoop 
to come to a place where there might be mosquitos, screaming  children, 
Neanderthals who wouldn't know Buxtehude from Albinoni, unleashed dogs  (some 
of 
them mongrel), anarchists, greedy slumlords, lawyers, the  anointed, the 
benighted, and others too depraved to even think  about -- for a measly 
$80,000, 
wouldn't you want to be sure that any  and all documentation of the 
embarrassment 
was in your hands so it could  be suppressed too?  

Al  Krigman
Left of Richard Wagner




** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Elizabeth F Campion]

First - communication under circumstances such as pre- or mid-concert
could be easily garbled.

Second - seeing brilliant photos altered to make everyone look like a
new, long-life, replacement bulb was cool.
So there was a happy consequence to the perception / response to the
request.

Third - why is it never enough?
I feel gifted with the sound and sight and convenience of having the
Orchestra play close to home.
Do we demand more?
Souvenirs? autographs? photos?

I am now in the awkward position of being grateful to the Orchestra, the
Sponsors and the crowd, and desirous of seeing their wishes honored,
while also feeling grateful to Kyle, who shared some fun and fabulous
photos (and made me long to see the before and after alteration versions)
even though he may be defying or taunting the very organization that made
Saturday night so sublime.

Maybe since we are a "List" and not a "Web-site" the request does not
apply.

Living is complicated.

Best!
Liz

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 18:05:37 -0400 "David Toccafondi"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Kyle, that's freaking crazy and the Philadelphia Orchestra should be
ashamed!  If someone came up to me and told me that, I can promise you
those photos would be on every website I could get access to.  There is
no legal reason preventing you from putting those photos online.  Nobody
there had anything remotely close to a reasonable expectation of privacy,
the photos are not portraying anyone in a false or even a negative light,
and you're not using them to promote a product.  If you don't want to
risk posting the un-censored photos, I'll be more than glad to put them
on my website for you so u can link to them. 

dave



On 7/23/07, Kyle Cassidy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ross pretty much had it down in his review.

I was photo-documenting the whole thing for those of you affeared of
traveling SOBA after dark and after I'd taken about ... six photos a
woman in a yellow "Philadelphia Orchestra" t-shirt came over to me and 
told me that "photographs of the orchestra cannot appear on a website"
(I kid you not) -- which I took for a moment to be some sort of vampire
thing -- like, they just wouldn't show up on film so I was wasting my 
time pressing the shutter button, but then I realized she meant that she
was telling me I wasn't _allowed_ to show anybody photographs of the
orchestra -- which surprised me, it being a public event, outdoors, to 
which the media had been invited. But, nonetheless, I have adhered to
her request as best I can.





Elizabeth Campion   Cell Phone: 215-880-2930
215-546-0550 Main, -546-9871 fax,  Desk + VM: 215-790-5653
PRUDENTIAL, FOX & ROACH REALTORS, LLC
Please read Consumer Notice & enjoy "HOME PILOT" tools at
 www.PruFoxRoach.com

RE: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Kyle Cassidy]

They probably were roundly embarrassed by our knuckle-dragging behavior
-- the audience persistently applauded between movements (and sometimes
whenever it got quiet in the middle of a piece) and mistook America the
Beautiful for the National Anthem and leapt to their feet. But such
a reception serves them right! I would have chased them back to the
academy myself but there were a bunch of muggers already in pursuit --
drooling about all those fancy Peccatte violin bows they could pawn for
new clothes at the Second Mile.




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]

In a message dated 7/23/2007 6:08:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

the Philadelphia Orchestra should be ashamed

The orchestra and its second-string (good enough for the bumpkins)
conductor only got $80,000 to oom-pah in the specially-seeded Clark Park
bowl. So they obviously made a big sacrifice to grace our little
community and should at least have exclusive rights to audio and visual
records of their having been there.
 
After all, if you were the great Philadelphia Orchestra -- and had to
stoop to come to a place where there might be mosquitos, screaming
children, Neanderthals who wouldn't know Buxtehude from Albinoni,
unleashed dogs (some of them mongrel), anarchists, greedy slumlords,
lawyers, the anointed, the benighted, and others too depraved to even
think about -- for a measly $80,000, wouldn't you want to be sure that
any and all documentation of the embarrassment was in your hands so it
could be suppressed too? 


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Turner,Kathleen]

I suspect that if you look at the program from any performance of the 
Philadelphia Orchestra, there will be a statement to the effect that all 
recording and photography rights are reserved -- just as they are when you go 
to nearly any concert, I don't care whether it's the Rolling Stones or Raffi.  
The fact that the concert was free and in a public place doesn't override their 
right to control publication of photographs of the orchestra - and posting of 
photographs on a web site does constitute publication.
 
Frankly, I'm quite surprised that people find this so surprising!
 
Kathleen



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon 7/23/2007 6:29 PM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park


In a message dated 7/23/2007 6:08:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] writes:

the Philadelphia Orchestra should be ashamed

The orchestra and its second-string (good enough for the bumpkins) conductor 
only got $80,000 to oom-pah in the specially-seeded Clark Park bowl. So they 
obviously made a big sacrifice to grace our little community and should at 
least have exclusive rights to audio and visual records of their having been 
there.
 
After all, if you were the great Philadelphia Orchestra -- and had to stoop to 
come to a place where there might be mosquitos, screaming children, 
Neanderthals who wouldn't know Buxtehude from Albinoni, unleashed dogs (some of 
them mongrel), anarchists, greedy slumlords, lawyers, the anointed, the 
benighted, and others too depraved to even think about -- for a measly $80,000, 
wouldn't you want to be sure that any and all documentation of the 
embarrassment was in your hands so it could be suppressed too? 
 
Al Krigman
Left of Richard Wagner





Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com 
<http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour/?ncid=AOLAOF0002000982> .

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Philip Forrest]

The attempt at control of media recording the activities of the symphony is 
probably due also to the very stringent guidelines of the performers' union.  
Usually, only very official photos of the performers are allowed to be 
published.  They must be doing just their job and nothing more.  No nose 
picking, no looking at the audience, no talking, etc.  they can lose their 
jobs for being photographed doing something other than playing or keeping up 
with their music between times when they have to play.
Perhaps this was just an attempt at courtesy for the benefit of the musicians.

PhilFo



On Monday 23 July 2007 18:41, Turner,Kathleen wrote:
> I suspect that if you look at the program from any performance of the
> Philadelphia Orchestra, there will be a statement to the effect that all
> recording and photography rights are reserved -- just as they are when you
> go to nearly any concert, I don't care whether it's the Rolling Stones or
> Raffi.  The fact that the concert was free and in a public place doesn't
> override their right to control publication of photographs of the orchestra
> - and posting of photographs on a web site does constitute publication.
>
> Frankly, I'm quite surprised that people find this so surprising!
>
> Kathleen
>
> 
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Mon 7/23/2007 6:29 PM
> To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
> Subject: Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park
>
>
> In a message dated 7/23/2007 6:08:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>   the Philadelphia Orchestra should be ashamed
>
> The orchestra and its second-string (good enough for the bumpkins)
> conductor only got $80,000 to oom-pah in the specially-seeded Clark Park
> bowl. So they obviously made a big sacrifice to grace our little community
> and should at least have exclusive rights to audio and visual records of
> their having been there.
>
> After all, if you were the great Philadelphia Orchestra -- and had to stoop
> to come to a place where there might be mosquitos, screaming children,
> Neanderthals who wouldn't know Buxtehude from Albinoni, unleashed dogs
> (some of them mongrel), anarchists, greedy slumlords, lawyers, the
> anointed, the benighted, and others too depraved to even think about -- for
> a measly $80,000, wouldn't you want to be sure that any and all
> documentation of the embarrassment was in your hands so it could be
> suppressed too?
>
> Al Krigman
> Left of Richard Wagner
>
>
>
> 
>
> Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com
> <http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour/?ncid=AOLAOF0002000982> .

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.

RE: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Kyle Cassidy]

>I suspect that if you look at the program from any performance of the
Philadelphia Orchestra, 
>there will be a statement to the effect that all recording and
photography rights are 
>reserved -- just as they are when you go to nearly any concert, I don't
care whether it's the 
>Rolling Stones or Raffi.  The fact that the concert was free and in a
public place doesn't 
>override their right to control publication of photographs of the
orchestra - and posting of 
>photographs on a web site does constitute publication.
 
>Frankly, I'm quite surprised that people find this so surprising!
 
I'm not a lawyer, but I'll cite this USA today guide on the legal rights
of photographers found here
(http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/andrewkantor/2006-08-11-photogra
phy-rights_x.htm) oft cited by the National Press Photographers
Associtation -- some highlights of which are:

The bottom line
Except in special circumstances (e.g., certain government facilities),
there are no laws prohibiting the taking of photographs on public or
private property. If you can be there, you can take pictures there:
streets, malls, parking lots, office buildings. You do not need
permission to do so, even on private property. [...] Subject to specific
limits, photographers can publish any photos they take, provided those
photos do not violate the privacy of the subject. This includes photos
taken while trespassing or otherwise being someplace they shouldn't be.
Taking photos and publishing photos are two separate issues.

[...] 

Whether we can take a photograph is determined by whether the subject
has a reasonable expectation of privacy
or seclusion. If not - if he's visible to the public (even on private
property) - photography is legal.
The logic is simple: If you can see it, you can photograph it. If it
requires extraordinary means to see (e.g., using a
telephoto lens, or trespassing on property not open to the public such
as a private office), then you may not be
able to photograph it legally.

[...]

Photographs taken in public places generally are not actionable. Photos
of crimes, arrests and accidents
usually are considered newsworthy and immune from privacy claims."

[]


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[David Toccafondi]

Kathleen, in America we have the right to take photos of pretty much
whatever we want without permission--people, pets, small children,
orchestras, bridges, shopping malls, houses, art museums, public property,
private property, government buildings, etc. *Very* few photographs are
actually "illegal" to take.  Similarly, we have a right to publish most
photos without permission.  There are exceptions to these rules:  We can't
invade somebody's right to privacy (which is seldom an issue in a public
park).  We can't portray them in a false light.  And we can't use
photographs of people to sell a product, etc. without their permission and
usually some form of payment.  (although we can sell the photos themselves
without permission in most cases).

The Philadelphia Orchestra cannot simply declare that they constitute an
exception to the law and that we aren't allowed to take or display photos of
them on websites.   Not only would I be allowed to publish a photo taken of
them in a public park, I would most likely be within my legal rights to
publish a photo i'd taken of them inside the Academy of Music.  What
frightens me is the number of people that believe otherwise, in this case
simply because some woman in a yellow t-shirt told them so.


dave


On 7/23/07, Turner,Kathleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 I suspect that if you look at the program from any performance of the
Philadelphia Orchestra, there will be a statement to the effect that all
recording and photography rights are reserved -- just as they are when you
go to nearly any concert, I don't care whether it's the Rolling Stones or
Raffi.  The fact that the concert was free and in a public place doesn't
override their right to control publication of photographs of the orchestra
- and posting of photographs on a web site does constitute publication.

Frankly, I'm quite surprised that people find this so surprising!

Kathleen

RE: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Kyle Cassidy]

I mentioned it in the first post, it was a yellow t-shirt that said
"philadelphia orchestra".

I was permitted to photograph lewis with impunity.

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 4:56 PM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

In a message dated 7/25/2007 4:31:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

The Orchestra doesn't have any legal standing on this issue.


What's never been clarified is whether the notorious "woman in the
yellow tee-shirt" (who may or may not have threatened to shove Kyle's
camera into parts of his body not seen in Clark Park since Judith Rodin
drove out the proselytes and fug crushers) was wearing "a" yellow tee
shirt or one of "those" yellow tee shirts.
 
Enquiring minds want to know.
Al Krigman





Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com
<http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour/?ncid=AOLAOF0002000982>
.


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Mario Giorno]

B

It's meaningless to a company that wants to control it's exposure and
public relations. He could be Richard Avedon or Annie Liebowitz, if he
doesn't work for a news organization (newspaper, magazine, industry trade
paper) that doesn't give them the kind of exposure they want, they'll be
nervous about letting him in the door. It's not just Kyle, Bruce, it's any
freelancer.




On 7/25/07, B Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


You know, of course, that Kyle's work is featured across the world. ;-)


   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Street
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Talking
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_Rushdie
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dee_Dee_Myers
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Buchanan


On 7/25/07, Mario Giorno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> B
>
>  This may seem elitist, at first, but the Inky's photog has a
> greater press credential than Kyle. Kyle doesn't shoot for a major national
> news organization, he shoots for himself. With the Inky's photos and
> article, the Orchestra knows that it's getting regional and national media
> exposure that it can, to some degree, control. With an independent photog
> like Kyle, who isn't attached as an employee to a news organization, the
> Orchestra doesn't know where it's likeness is being displayed, either online
> or in print.
>
>  Between you and me and the list, I believe that Kyle still has the
> legal right to shoot photography of the Orchestra when it's in a public
> place like Clark Park. No one owns Clark Park. Now in a concert hall or
> arena, it would be a different story. If the Orchestra were playing in a
> venue that was commercial, but not public, you would need to check with
> whomever owns and controls to venue. As far as I'm concerned, however, the
> Orchestra lost its protection from unrestricted photgraphy or media
> recording when they appeared in an open public park.
>
> My Two Cents,
>
> Mario
>
> On 7/25/07, B Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> >
> > Though its not in the online edition,
> > did anyone else see the photos of the conductor and the orchestra in
> > Monday's Local News section of the Inky?
> >
> > If they can publish the pics, why can't Kyle?
> >
> >
> >  On 7/23/07, David Toccafondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > >
> > > Kathleen, in America we have the right to take photos of pretty much
> > > whatever we want without permission--people, pets, small children,
> > > orchestras, bridges, shopping malls, houses, art museums, public property,
> > > private property, government buildings, etc. *Very* few photographs are
> > > actually "illegal" to take.  Similarly, we have a right to publish most
> > > photos without permission.  There are exceptions to these rules:  We can't
> > > invade somebody's right to privacy (which is seldom an issue in a public
> > > park).  We can't portray them in a false light.  And we can't use
> > > photographs of people to sell a product, etc. without their permission and
> > > usually some form of payment.  (although we can sell the photos themselves
> > > without permission in most cases).
> > >
> > > The Philadelphia Orchestra cannot simply declare that they
> > > constitute an exception to the law and that we aren't allowed to take or
> > > display photos of them on websites.   Not only would I be allowed to 
publish
> > > a photo taken of them in a public park, I would most likely be within my
> > > legal rights to publish a photo i'd taken of them inside the Academy of
> > > Music.  What frightens me is the number of people that believe otherwise, 
in
> > > this case simply because some woman in a yellow t-shirt told them so.
> > >
> > >
> > > dave
> > >
> > >
> > > On 7/23/07, Turner,Kathleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >  I suspect that if you look at the program from any performance of
> > > > the Philadelphia Orchestra, there will be a statement to the effect 
that all
> > > > recording and photography rights are reserved -- just as they are when 
you
> > > > go to nearly any concert, I don't care whether it's the Rolling Stones 
or
> > > > Raffi.  The fact that the concert was free and in a public place doesn't
> > > > override their right to control publication of photographs of the 
orchestra
> > > > - and posting of photographs on a web site does constitute publication.
> > > >
> > > > Frankly, I'm quite surprised that people find this so surprising!
> > > >
> > > > Kathleen
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[David Toccafondi]

Presumably, this woman wasn't actually "in" the orchestra, so somebody
should have photographed *her* and put the photos on lots of websites.

dave


On 7/25/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 In a message dated 7/25/2007 4:31:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

The Orchestra doesn't have any legal standing on this issue.

 What's never been clarified is whether the notorious "woman in the yellow
tee-shirt" (who may or may not have threatened to shove Kyle's camera into
parts of his body not seen in Clark Park since Judith Rodin drove out the
proselytes and fug crushers) was wearing "a" yellow tee shirt or one of
"those" yellow tee shirts.

Enquiring minds want to know.
Al Krigman



--
Get a sneak peek of the all-new 
AOL.com
.

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Anthony West]

It saddens me to see a man who, because of a problem that has been 
steadily increasing over the years, is now incapable of expressing a 
simple esthetic response to a simple esthetic event such as a concert. 
Everything is political for Ray now. God help us if we ever catch his 
disease!


I wish you healing, Ray. May you rediscover the sustenance of art someday.

-- Tony West

UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN wrote:
well, I haven't been paying attention to the orchestra photos, but I 
did think it was interesting to see how two newspapers handled gutmann 
and blackwell's first photo-op since the ucd scandal:




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

B Andersen wrote:

Though its not in the online edition 
,

did anyone else see the photos of the conductor and the orchestra in
Monday's Local News section of the Inky?



well, I haven't been paying attention to the orchestra 
photos, but I did think it was interesting to see how two 
newspapers handled gutmann and blackwell's first photo-op 
since the ucd scandal:



from the dp:

http://media.collegepublisher.com/media/paper882/stills/q83yo8sz.png


from the uc review:

http://www.ucreview.com/clients/ucreview/7-25-2007-10-59-59-AM-10475212.jpg



..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.
  "It is very clear on this listserve who
   these people are. Ray has admitted being
   connected to this forger."  -- Tony West




















































































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Mario Giorno]

B

This may seem elitist, at first, but the Inky's photog has a greater
press credential than Kyle. Kyle doesn't shoot for a major national news
organization, he shoots for himself. With the Inky's photos and article, the
Orchestra knows that it's getting regional and national media exposure that
it can, to some degree, control. With an independent photog like Kyle, who
isn't attached as an employee to a news organization, the Orchestra doesn't
know where it's likeness is being displayed, either online or in print.

Between you and me and the list, I believe that Kyle still has the
legal right to shoot photography of the Orchestra when it's in a public
place like Clark Park. No one owns Clark Park. Now in a concert hall or
arena, it would be a different story. If the Orchestra were playing in a
venue that was commercial, but not public, you would need to check with
whomever owns and controls to venue. As far as I'm concerned, however, the
Orchestra lost its protection from unrestricted photgraphy or media
recording when they appeared in an open public park.

My Two Cents,

Mario

On 7/25/07, B Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Though its not in the online edition,
did anyone else see the photos of the conductor and the orchestra in
Monday's Local News section of the Inky?

If they can publish the pics, why can't Kyle?


On 7/23/07, David Toccafondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Kathleen, in America we have the right to take photos of pretty much
> whatever we want without permission--people, pets, small children,
> orchestras, bridges, shopping malls, houses, art museums, public property,
> private property, government buildings, etc. *Very* few photographs are
> actually "illegal" to take.  Similarly, we have a right to publish most
> photos without permission.  There are exceptions to these rules:  We can't
> invade somebody's right to privacy (which is seldom an issue in a public
> park).  We can't portray them in a false light.  And we can't use
> photographs of people to sell a product, etc. without their permission and
> usually some form of payment.  (although we can sell the photos themselves
> without permission in most cases).
>
> The Philadelphia Orchestra cannot simply declare that they constitute an
> exception to the law and that we aren't allowed to take or display photos of
> them on websites.   Not only would I be allowed to publish a photo taken of
> them in a public park, I would most likely be within my legal rights to
> publish a photo i'd taken of them inside the Academy of Music.  What
> frightens me is the number of people that believe otherwise, in this case
> simply because some woman in a yellow t-shirt told them so.
>
>
> dave
>
>
> On 7/23/07, Turner,Kathleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >  I suspect that if you look at the program from any performance of the
> > Philadelphia Orchestra, there will be a statement to the effect that all
> > recording and photography rights are reserved -- just as they are when you
> > go to nearly any concert, I don't care whether it's the Rolling Stones or
> > Raffi.  The fact that the concert was free and in a public place doesn't
> > override their right to control publication of photographs of the orchestra
> > - and posting of photographs on a web site does constitute publication.
> >
> > Frankly, I'm quite surprised that people find this so surprising!
> >
> > Kathleen
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[Krfapt]

 
In a message dated 7/25/2007 4:31:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

The  Orchestra doesn't have any legal standing on this  issue.



What's never been clarified is whether the notorious "woman in the  yellow 
tee-shirt" (who may or may not have threatened to shove Kyle's  camera into 
parts of his body not seen in Clark Park since Judith Rodin drove  out the 
proselytes and fug crushers) was wearing "a" yellow tee shirt or  one of 
"those" 
yellow tee shirts.
 
Enquiring minds want to know.
Al Krigman



** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[B Andersen]

You know, of course, that Kyle's work is featured across the world. ;-)


  - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Street
  - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Talking
  - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_Rushdie
  - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dee_Dee_Myers
  - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter
  - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Buchanan


On 7/25/07, Mario Giorno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


B

 This may seem elitist, at first, but the Inky's photog has a greater
press credential than Kyle. Kyle doesn't shoot for a major national news
organization, he shoots for himself. With the Inky's photos and article, the
Orchestra knows that it's getting regional and national media exposure that
it can, to some degree, control. With an independent photog like Kyle, who
isn't attached as an employee to a news organization, the Orchestra doesn't
know where it's likeness is being displayed, either online or in print.

 Between you and me and the list, I believe that Kyle still has the
legal right to shoot photography of the Orchestra when it's in a public
place like Clark Park. No one owns Clark Park. Now in a concert hall or
arena, it would be a different story. If the Orchestra were playing in a
venue that was commercial, but not public, you would need to check with
whomever owns and controls to venue. As far as I'm concerned, however, the
Orchestra lost its protection from unrestricted photgraphy or media
recording when they appeared in an open public park.

My Two Cents,

Mario

On 7/25/07, B Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Though its not in the online edition,
> did anyone else see the photos of the conductor and the orchestra in
> Monday's Local News section of the Inky?
>
> If they can publish the pics, why can't Kyle?
>
>
>  On 7/23/07, David Toccafondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> >
> > Kathleen, in America we have the right to take photos of pretty much
> > whatever we want without permission--people, pets, small children,
> > orchestras, bridges, shopping malls, houses, art museums, public property,
> > private property, government buildings, etc. *Very* few photographs are
> > actually "illegal" to take.  Similarly, we have a right to publish most
> > photos without permission.  There are exceptions to these rules:  We can't
> > invade somebody's right to privacy (which is seldom an issue in a public
> > park).  We can't portray them in a false light.  And we can't use
> > photographs of people to sell a product, etc. without their permission and
> > usually some form of payment.  (although we can sell the photos themselves
> > without permission in most cases).
> >
> > The Philadelphia Orchestra cannot simply declare that they constitute
> > an exception to the law and that we aren't allowed to take or display photos
> > of them on websites.   Not only would I be allowed to publish a photo taken
> > of them in a public park, I would most likely be within my legal rights to
> > publish a photo i'd taken of them inside the Academy of Music.  What
> > frightens me is the number of people that believe otherwise, in this case
> > simply because some woman in a yellow t-shirt told them so.
> >
> >
> > dave
> >
> >
> > On 7/23/07, Turner,Kathleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >  I suspect that if you look at the program from any performance of
> > > the Philadelphia Orchestra, there will be a statement to the effect that 
all
> > > recording and photography rights are reserved -- just as they are when you
> > > go to nearly any concert, I don't care whether it's the Rolling Stones or
> > > Raffi.  The fact that the concert was free and in a public place doesn't
> > > override their right to control publication of photographs of the 
orchestra
> > > - and posting of photographs on a web site does constitute publication.
> > >
> > > Frankly, I'm quite surprised that people find this so surprising!
> > >
> > > Kathleen
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[John Ellingsworth]

In this case there is no door, and everyone is free to photograph as 
they wish.


The Orchestra doesn't have any legal standing on this issue.

A good quick reference is the this guide:
http://www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf

Regards,

John Ellingsworth

Mario Giorno wrote:

B

It's meaningless to a company that wants to control it's exposure and
public relations. He could be Richard Avedon or Annie Liebowitz, if he
doesn't work for a news organization (newspaper, magazine, industry trade
paper) that doesn't give them the kind of exposure they want, they'll be
nervous about letting him in the door. It's not just Kyle, Bruce, it's any
freelancer.




On 7/25/07, B Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


You know, of course, that Kyle's work is featured across the world. ;-)


   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Street
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Talking
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_Rushdie
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dee_Dee_Myers
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter
   - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Buchanan


On 7/25/07, Mario Giorno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> B
>
>  This may seem elitist, at first, but the Inky's photog has a
> greater press credential than Kyle. Kyle doesn't shoot for a major 
national

> news organization, he shoots for himself. With the Inky's photos and
> article, the Orchestra knows that it's getting regional and national 
media
> exposure that it can, to some degree, control. With an independent 
photog
> like Kyle, who isn't attached as an employee to a news organization, 
the
> Orchestra doesn't know where it's likeness is being displayed, 
either online

> or in print.
>
>  Between you and me and the list, I believe that Kyle still has the
> legal right to shoot photography of the Orchestra when it's in a public
> place like Clark Park. No one owns Clark Park. Now in a concert hall or
> arena, it would be a different story. If the Orchestra were playing 
in a

> venue that was commercial, but not public, you would need to check with
> whomever owns and controls to venue. As far as I'm concerned, 
however, the

> Orchestra lost its protection from unrestricted photgraphy or media
> recording when they appeared in an open public park.
>
> My Two Cents,
>
> Mario
>
> On 7/25/07, B Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> >
> > Though its not in the online 
edition,

> > did anyone else see the photos of the conductor and the orchestra in
> > Monday's Local News section of the Inky?
> >
> > If they can publish the pics, why can't Kyle?
> >
> >
> >  On 7/23/07, David Toccafondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > >
> > > Kathleen, in America we have the right to take photos of pretty 
much

> > > whatever we want without permission--people, pets, small children,
> > > orchestras, bridges, shopping malls, houses, art museums, public 
property,
> > > private property, government buildings, etc. *Very* few 
photographs are
> > > actually "illegal" to take.  Similarly, we have a right to 
publish most
> > > photos without permission.  There are exceptions to these 
rules:  We can't
> > > invade somebody's right to privacy (which is seldom an issue in 
a public

> > > park).  We can't portray them in a false light.  And we can't use
> > > photographs of people to sell a product, etc. without their 
permission and
> > > usually some form of payment.  (although we can sell the photos 
themselves

> > > without permission in most cases).
> > >
> > > The Philadelphia Orchestra cannot simply declare that they
> > > constitute an exception to the law and that we aren't allowed to 
take or
> > > display photos of them on websites.   Not only would I be 
allowed to publish
> > > a photo taken of them in a public park, I would most likely be 
within my
> > > legal rights to publish a photo i'd taken of them inside the 
Academy of
> > > Music.  What frightens me is the number of people that believe 
otherwise, in
> > > this case simply because some woman in a yellow t-shirt told 
them so.

> > >
> > >
> > > dave
> > >
> > >
> > > On 7/23/07, Turner,Kathleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >  I suspect that if you look at the program from any 
performance of
> > > > the Philadelphia Orchestra, there will be a statement to the 
effect that all
> > > > recording and photography rights are reserved -- just as they 
are when you
> > > > go to nearly any concert, I don't care whether it's the 
Rolling Stones or
> > > > Raffi.  The fact that the concert was free and in a public 
place doesn't
> > > > override their right to control publication of photographs of 
the orchestra
> > > > - and posting of photographs on a web site does constitute 
publication.

> > > >
> > > > Frankly, I'm quite surprised that people find this so surprising!
> > > >
> > > > Kathleen
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>





You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To 

Re: [UC] Photos from the orchestra in the park

[B Andersen]

Though its not in the online edition ,
did anyone else see the photos of the conductor and the orchestra in
Monday's Local News section of the Inky?

If they can publish the pics, why can't Kyle?


On 7/23/07, David Toccafondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Kathleen, in America we have the right to take photos of pretty much
whatever we want without permission--people, pets, small children,
orchestras, bridges, shopping malls, houses, art museums, public property,
private property, government buildings, etc. *Very* few photographs are
actually "illegal" to take.  Similarly, we have a right to publish most
photos without permission.  There are exceptions to these rules:  We can't
invade somebody's right to privacy (which is seldom an issue in a public
park).  We can't portray them in a false light.  And we can't use
photographs of people to sell a product, etc. without their permission and
usually some form of payment.  (although we can sell the photos themselves
without permission in most cases).

The Philadelphia Orchestra cannot simply declare that they constitute an
exception to the law and that we aren't allowed to take or display photos of
them on websites.   Not only would I be allowed to publish a photo taken of
them in a public park, I would most likely be within my legal rights to
publish a photo i'd taken of them inside the Academy of Music.  What
frightens me is the number of people that believe otherwise, in this case
simply because some woman in a yellow t-shirt told them so.


dave


On 7/23/07, Turner,Kathleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  I suspect that if you look at the program from any performance of the
> Philadelphia Orchestra, there will be a statement to the effect that all
> recording and photography rights are reserved -- just as they are when you
> go to nearly any concert, I don't care whether it's the Rolling Stones or
> Raffi.  The fact that the concert was free and in a public place doesn't
> override their right to control publication of photographs of the orchestra
> - and posting of photographs on a web site does constitute publication.
>
> Frankly, I'm quite surprised that people find this so surprising!
>
> Kathleen
>
>
>