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
