Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 78

Thread: Photographers' rights in Singapore

  1. #21

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    A good discussion on Privacy laws here.

    We have been criticised by others for not having privacy laws here.

    Would you wanna see yourself, your loved ones, child, friends being depicted in any Commercial Ads, Stock Photography, Photographic exhibition? Some might even be controversial as the pictures are montaged/edited together in this age of Digital Manipulation.

    Give you an example, one of my girlfriend was shot on the street last year. Her photos was montaged by the photographer for a stock photo agency. The photos was subsequently used by a Call Chatline company and their ads are splashed across some of the classified sections. She was greatly disturbed and helpless as she cant do a single thing about it as the photo was taken in a public area. A lot of issues at hand is about the morality of the man behind the camera. What should and shouldnt be taken for commercial purposes or to glorify oneself in Exhibitions or Competitions. There are already many controversial exhibitions in the past and we are getting lots and lots of people using this loophole.

    Food for thought? If it ever happen to you. Would you still be supporting this?

    Keep it up...a meaningful discussion
    Last edited by Buckteeth LCL; 13th November 2007 at 02:55 PM.

  2. #22

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123 View Post
    The laws applicable in the United States relating to model releases are the result of specific legislation enacted in the United States.

    There is no equilvalent legaislation in Singapore as far as I am aware.
    Ya right, we shall take your word for it.

  3. #23

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Quote Originally Posted by Buckteeth LCL View Post
    A good discussion on Privacy laws here.

    We have been criticised by others for not having privacy laws here.

    Would you wanna see yourself, your loved ones, child, friends being depicted in any Commercial Ads, Stock Photography, Photographic exhibition? Some might even be controversial as the pictures are montaged/edited together in this age of Digital Manipulation.

    Give you an example, one of my girlfriend was shot on the street last year. Her photos was montaged by the photographer for a stock photo agency. The photos was subsequently used by a Call Chatline company and their ads are splashed across some of the classified sections. She was greatly disturbed and helpless as she cant do a single thing about it as the photo was taken in a public area. A lot of issues at hand is about the morality of the man behind the camera. What should and shouldnt be taken for commercial purposes or to glorify oneself in Exhibitions or Competitions. There are already many controversial exhibitions in the past and we are getting lots and lots of people using this loophole.

    Food for thought? If it ever happen to you. Would you still be supporting this?

    Keep it up...a meaningful discussion
    Now you know why loads of amatuers are taking photos of paid models in secret hotel suites instead?

  4. #24
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Sure, you may, or if you have any alternative viewpoint or information, you may also choose to share your thoughts here

    If you are able to locate any, I would be very interested to know

    Quote Originally Posted by kenso View Post
    Ya right, we shall take your word for it.

  5. #25

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Quote Originally Posted by Buckteeth LCL View Post
    A good discussion on Privacy laws here.

    We have been criticised by others for not having privacy laws here.

    Would you wanna see yourself, your loved ones, child, friends being depicted in any Commercial Ads, Stock Photography, Photographic exhibition? Some might even be controversial as the pictures are montaged/edited together in this age of Digital Manipulation.

    Give you an example, one of my girlfriend was shot on the street last year. Her photos was montaged by the photographer for a stock photo agency. The photos was subsequently used by a Call Chatline company and their ads are splashed across some of the classified sections. She was greatly disturbed and helpless as she cant do a single thing about it as the photo was taken in a public area. A lot of issues at hand is about the morality of the man behind the camera. What should and shouldnt be taken for commercial purposes or to glorify oneself in Exhibitions or Competitions. There are already many controversial exhibitions in the past and we are getting lots and lots of people using this loophole.

    Food for thought? If it ever happen to you. Would you still be supporting this?

    Keep it up...a meaningful discussion
    just asking, has your girlfriend done anything against that call chatline company? I mean at least consult a lawyer for that. Often, it is the individual who did not do anything about it, not that he/she does not have the right to do it. I am not a lawyer, so I can't give you any advise. But you may want to google "tort law, defamation".

  6. #26
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Yeap, I concur with this, I think his case falls within the local Hanis Hussey case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Draccoyap View Post
    just asking, has your girlfriend done anything against that call chatline company? I mean at least consult a lawyer for that. Often, it is the individual who did not do anything about it, not that he/she does not have the right to do it. I am not a lawyer, so I can't give you any advise. But you may want to google "tort law, defamation".

  7. #27

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Quote Originally Posted by unseen View Post
    http://www.ipos.gov.sg/leftNav/cop/O...and+Rights.htm

    Read yourself.
    "Commissioning: If a portrait/photograph/engraving is commissioned by another party, the commissioner owns the copyright in the work. If the portrait/photograph/engraving is required for a particular purpose, this purpose must be communicated to the commissioned party. While the commissioner is the copyright owner, the commissioned party has the right to stop others from doing any act comprised in the copyright, unless such act is done for the particular purpose for which the portrait/photograph/engraving is created.

    For other types of commissioned works, ownership belongs to the commissioned party, unless the commissioner and commissioned party otherwise agree.

    As mentioned in the introduction, the copyright owner may transfer his rights to another party or entity either partially or wholly."
    if it is as simple as that, i will be real glad to claim all my wedding album photos (softcopy) from the bridal shop that I paid to as a commissioner.

    nonetheless, I did not pursue that because my wife stopped me from doing it. too bad for me.
    Last edited by Draccoyap; 13th November 2007 at 05:45 PM.

  8. #28
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Actually you probably can, but since your wife stopped you, then its no longer an issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Draccoyap View Post
    if it is as simple as that, i will be real glad to claim all my wedding album photos (softcopy) from the bridal shop that I paid to as a commissional.

    nonetheless, I did not pursue that because my wife stopped me from doing it. too bad for me.

  9. #29

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123 View Post
    Actually you probably can, but since your wife stopped you, then its no longer an issue.
    if you tell me I CAN, (not probably) i will do it, whether or not my wife will stop me again. but nobody can confirm to me yet.

  10. #30
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    I can only give you a firmer can or cannot if you can provide more information on the transaction, e.g. invoices/contract/receipt/verbal agreements etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Draccoyap View Post
    if you tell me I CAN, (not probably) i will do it, whether or not my wife will stop me again. but nobody can confirm to me yet.

  11. #31
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Quote Originally Posted by Buckteeth LCL View Post
    A good discussion on Privacy laws here.

    We have been criticised by others for not having privacy laws here.

    Would you wanna see yourself, your loved ones, child, friends being depicted in any Commercial Ads, Stock Photography, Photographic exhibition? Some might even be controversial as the pictures are montaged/edited together in this age of Digital Manipulation.

    Give you an example, one of my girlfriend was shot on the street last year. Her photos was montaged by the photographer for a stock photo agency. The photos was subsequently used by a Call Chatline company and their ads are splashed across some of the classified sections. She was greatly disturbed and helpless as she cant do a single thing about it as the photo was taken in a public area. A lot of issues at hand is about the morality of the man behind the camera. What should and shouldnt be taken for commercial purposes or to glorify oneself in Exhibitions or Competitions. There are already many controversial exhibitions in the past and we are getting lots and lots of people using this loophole.

    Food for thought? If it ever happen to you. Would you still be supporting this?

    Keep it up...a meaningful discussion
    if it has happen to me or my loved ones, it is ok if there is no derogatory implication. i'm a photographer myself, so i feel i need to be more understanding than other people.

    if there is commerical interest involved, then the main subjects (i.e. not a crowd) in the photograph should be paid.

    if it is meant for exhibition and competition, i'm completely fine with it.

    care to share what do you mean by "controversial exhibitions"? you need not name the photographers if you feel uncomfrotable with it.

  12. #32
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Quote Originally Posted by kenso View Post
    Now you know why loads of amatuers are taking photos of paid models in secret hotel suites instead?
    i dun catch that. what are you implying?

    p.s. i dun do model shoots and hence i have no conflict of interest in the discussion.

  13. #33

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    I'm no lawyer, just wrote this based on a little research on the net and my own knowledge on law (based on what I learnt in school - I'm in the healthcare/medical sector)

    Assuming that there is no court order prohibiting the publishing of photos that identify the person (eg in rape cases, or juvenile cases), the photographer can take a picture of the person and publish it in the straits times with no model release (newspaper = commercial purpose). And the subject whose photograph is taken (probably the acuse) did not want his photo to be taken and much less published, what what can the subject do about it other than suck thumb or threaten to beat up the journalist and his photographer? The subject of photography surely can't demand royalties from the Sinapore Press Holdings.

    The other thing is what is a model release? How can the model sue you? Sufing the web, most sites say that model release is to protect privacy. It sure makes a big different if the model is going to sue you for royalties or sue you for invasion of privacy. In Sinapore, there are no general privacy law (did a google search already, also checked the statutes), so that model cannot sue you for invasion of privacy while he or she walks in the street.

    If its for royalties, I think this fall under contract law. The very fact is that there is no contract. Nobody signed any contract saying that they will pay this person in the street any money to take his potograph. So he wants to sue for royalties...his case probably does not hold water.

  14. #34
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Mostly correct, but I'll just add that whilst royalties are usually the result of contract, they are most likely based on intellectual property rights, or some other rights. The person of those rights grants a license to the person to use, and in turn the person pays royalties.

    Where someone infringes in such rights without a license, whilst there is no contract, such "royalties" or licensing fees, are often used as a basis on which the court would decide how much damages to award to the rights holder.

    Quote Originally Posted by Clement Low View Post
    I'm no lawyer, just wrote this based on a little research on the net and my own knowledge on law (based on what I learnt in school - I'm in the healthcare/medical sector)

    Assuming that there is no court order prohibiting the publishing of photos that identify the person (eg in rape cases, or juvenile cases), the photographer can take a picture of the person and publish it in the straits times with no model release (newspaper = commercial purpose). And the subject whose photograph is taken (probably the acuse) did not want his photo to be taken and much less published, what what can the subject do about it other than suck thumb or threaten to beat up the journalist and his photographer? The subject of photography surely can't demand royalties from the Sinapore Press Holdings.

    The other thing is what is a model release? How can the model sue you? Sufing the web, most sites say that model release is to protect privacy. It sure makes a big different if the model is going to sue you for royalties or sue you for invasion of privacy. In Sinapore, there are no general privacy law (did a google search already, also checked the statutes), so that model cannot sue you for invasion of privacy while he or she walks in the street.

    If its for royalties, I think this fall under contract law. The very fact is that there is no contract. Nobody signed any contract saying that they will pay this person in the street any money to take his potograph. So he wants to sue for royalties...his case probably does not hold water.

  15. #35

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Hi vince, as far as I checked, there are no case law where a person is paid royalties for his photograph taken in the street.

  16. #36
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Yeap there isn't.

    I was speaking generally in regard to royalties and the fact that it doesn't really have its roots in contract law but rather a means of avoiding infringement based on property rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Clement Low View Post
    Hi vince, as far as I checked, there are no case law where a person is paid royalties for his photograph taken in the street.

  17. #37

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Quote Originally Posted by zoossh View Post
    if it has happen to me or my loved ones, it is ok if there is no derogatory implication.
    well, theres the law abt pornographic, racist pictures etc.
    but sometimes its just not nice having ur pic printed on the front cover of say a magazine or newspaper without ur prior permission or knowledge. other times, for some ppl, it might be nice. but i think most of us would not like a photograph of us taken at the 'wrong time' being so widely publicized. furthermore, if the company or photographer uses the pic to make $$ it might get the person even more

  18. #38

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    generally, if a photo is taken with you in it in a public, the photographer has the right to publish as he wish. In copyright law, the subject owns nothing. Otherwise, the press will be sued like hell for publishing other people photo without permission. Think about it, if there bundle of right to the subject as come of you guys wanted, you will have to keep asking those models for right to publish their own photos. Do you want it to happen? i guess not.

    So as a subject in the photos, we just have to generous. If the photo is nicely taken and properly publish, why not accept it. if you wish, ask one from the photographer.

    As photographers, we have to use it properly. whether or not you owns the copyright to the photo, you may be sued in other aspect of law. As far as i know, tort law for example, is a right to all person in singapore to go against the photographer whom did not publish the photos appropriately.

    We all wanted to enjoy this hobby, but while enjoying yourself, think of others too.

  19. #39
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Quote Originally Posted by 2.8photography View Post
    well, theres the law abt pornographic, racist pictures etc.
    but sometimes its just not nice having ur pic printed on the front cover of say a magazine or newspaper without ur prior permission or knowledge. other times, for some ppl, it might be nice. but i think most of us would not like a photograph of us taken at the 'wrong time' being so widely publicized. furthermore, if the company or photographer uses the pic to make $$ it might get the person even more
    what do you mean by "wrong time"? you mean digging nose and scratching butts?

    i'm assuming that those photographs are done with good taste, good aesthetics and in good intention.

    sometimes laws are there in order to protect the general public, the photographer and the publisher, and more of the rules goes unwritten because they are more likely to be abused rather than useful.

    it didn't come on free and effortless for a photographer to do a good candid. so far we seem to imply that a photographer has "benefited" out of nothing, but actually they have to run everywhere to get the job on. it may not be a contract based deal of money versus photo, but may be part of a photographer;s daily work for his livelihood, and he shot something becos of the aesthetic value and appreciation - he is proud of what he shoot. a greater responsibility lies in the editorial and publisher.

    and we do come down hard on the press for that. understandably they should know better on how to get releases in a legal and reasonable way with respect of the subjects. but when things are for to depict passerbys, crowds or montages - it is more complicated. so do we think journalists should not be allowed to take photographs/videos of suspects coming out of the court? should we enforce tedious release requirements for bloggers? there are just plenty of implications that cannot be defined or regulated.

  20. #40
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: Photographers' rights in Singapore

    Quote Originally Posted by Draccoyap View Post
    So as a subject in the photos, we just have to generous.
    i agree with all you say in the above post, esp this. somehow, i find that with urbanisation, there is increased neurosis and paranoia. people does get upset over things that many others can feel very open about, over things that appear explainable but not exactly logical.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •