Distributing videos and pictures over the internet

[Saf]

I've got an idea! If it's OK to publish images of young girls on the internet forums it must be OK to publish images of farang, including those watching or propositioning the girls.

What do you think? Good idea?

[Johnnie F.]

No problem, if you got their permission to do so - if they want to be seen like attractive young women.

[Saf]

No-one seems to have the permission of the girls so I guess that it won't be necessary to get it form the drooling farang customers.

[dirtydog]

The videos are in the public domain and the girls are paid performers.

[Saf]

The videos are in the public domain and the girls are paid performers.

OK, I think I understand this now. If images are put first on YouTube they are then in the public domain and I can then post anywhere else on the internet.

Doesn't the paid performers things work the other way around from what you say, DD? I know that YouTube have been forced to remove some videos of paid performers far copyright reasons so that must mean it's OK to publish images of people who aren't paid. The internet is full of them.

[Saf]

There's a very good example of what I mean. Images of Paul Gadd in a bar with young girls were all over the internet but no-one could possibly have asked his permission because he had disappeared from public view at the time. It must be OK to take these prics. and put them on public forums - I take the point about starting wit YouTube though, DD.

[dirtydog]

When you upload a video to you tube you state that you own all content etc, also you choose whether to make it public or private, if someone doesn't want their image on youtube they only have to contact them and they will take the video down, if it happens several times youtube will ban the user.

[Saf]

When you upload a video to you tube you state that you own all content etc, also you choose whether to make it public or private, if someone doesn't want their image on youtube they only have to contact them and they will take the video down, if it happens several times youtube will ban the user.

I'm really trying to understand this so that I can give the right information. If someone can object to a video on YouTube and have it removed, it can't be 'in the public domain' in the sense that it's legally there and there can be no repercussions. Those videos in this thread are, if I understand you correctly, in the public domain. I don't think that the girls being paid performers achieves that, as I said earlier, so how did they come to be in the public domain and usable anywhere legally?

DD, I'm not trying to be difficult. I really do want to understand the legal side of this.

Ta. 

[dirtydog]

To legally own and distribute a video, ie as in youtube, you need a model release form from each person that can be recognised in the video, that is very rarely the case though as 99.9 percent is just amateur videos, if there is video footage of you and you want it taken down you just contact youtube.


DMCA Complaints
YouTube, Inc.
901 Cherry Ave.
Second Floor
San Bruno, CA 94066
USA
Fax: 650.872.8513
Email: copyright@youtube.com

Or through their website.

[dirtydog]

Also another important aspect is that the videos are not on this server, they are being presented in an iframe from youtube, they therefore in any way at all can be classed as being on this server, they do not use this servers bandwidth when played so the server of this site bares no responsibility for them or their content.

[Johnnie F.]

I haven't read them, but I think the TOS of Youtube include something like you as the uploader are giving a kind of "creative commons" license to other people. They can play it but not claim to own it. And as DD already said by uploading you also guarantee the liability for any copyright claims etc.

[Saf]

I think I understand that but I would guess that many if not most of the YouTube image and video posters don't have copyright for the material that they show but they show it nevertheless.

Look at it another way. If I take a picture in a public place, must I get the permission of everyone shown in the picture before I post it? Suppose I post it without permission on YouTube and then link that to either a private website or a public forum. What would be the possible consequences? I guess that if there is a complaint after a while I just remove it from YouTube. Is that right or could there be more serious consequences?

[Saf]

Another question about that, please.

If someone has some photos or videos showing some people and sends them privately to a few friends without the permission of the subjects, would that be a problem?

[Johnnie F.]

It also depends on the contents and the intention of the video. If you take a video in The Mall for example trying to explain what a nice place and how frequented by people from all over the world it is, and a somebody happens to not like the situation in which you accidentally filmed him, he cannot claim you having tried to defame him and ask for compensation. He can only ask the video being taken down from the public area or his face blurred in the video.

Another question about that, please.

If someone has some photos or videos showing some people and sends them privately to a few friends without the permission of the subjects, would that be a problem?

Also kind of depends on the circle of friends and the videos and the purpose of distribution. If your friends don't backstab you and send them to the subject, attempting to cause you problems, you should be fine. If the person hacks into a private forum, your PMs or email and sees the photos or videos he also has to answer how he got that info from your private correspondence. And then it won't be easy for him to prove the purpose of the correspondence. For example if you send some photographically documented negative news about a person to your friends it could rather be information for the purpose of warning than defamation of that subject.

In another extreme it could be distributing pornography for example.

[dirtydog]

Suppose I post it without permission on YouTube and then link that to either a private website or a public forum. What would be the possible consequences? I guess that if there is a complaint after a while I just remove it from YouTube.

The complaint should go to youtube as that would be the host, youtube would take it down, there is no point in complaining to websites that are showing it as they may or may not comply with your wishes and there is nothing you can do to them, ie if I find a picture of you half naked cavorting with the staff at a boy boy a gogo and post it here, ie hotlink it, you need to contact the site where the picture is hosted to get them to take it down, if it was uploaded to this site then you would need to contact this site.

[Saf]

Thanks guys. I think I've got that clear now. I know what's legal and what's possible.  Those mobile 'phone cameras are dynamite!

DD, you won't find me at a boy boy a gogo but you can continue to look if you want.  Remember to have the camera handy - you never know who might be there!

[Saf]

If the person hacks into a private forum, your PMs or email and sees the photos or videos he also has to answer how he got that info from your private correspondence. And then it won't be easy for him to prove the purpose of the correspondence. For example if you send some photographically documented negative news about a person to your friends it could rather be information for the purpose of warning than defamation of that subject.

In another extreme it could be distributing pornography for example.

Thanks. Those I've already looked into. There's a very clear Thai law or two to deal with that stuff.

[Johnnie F.]

Thanks guys. I think I've got that clear now. I know what's legal and what's possible.  Those mobile 'phone cameras are dynamite!

Watch out where you're taking photographs. If you're on a public street, whatever view you have is yours to photograph. If you go on somebody’s private property to take pictures, then you’d be stealing it. And if you even take pictures of that property while located on it that's like searching it without search warrant. You have to ask the owner for permission first. If you remember our topic Isaan Paparazzi for example that guy clearly took that picture illegally. Not only because he took a close-up picture of me without asking me first for permission and notify me about the moment he was going to take it for me to smile or stick the tongue out for and at him, but also because he took a picture  without asking for permission while he was on my property. His behavior was highly illegitimate. His picture was taken illegally. If he distributes that picture, passes it on to just anybody, and I get wind of it, he's gotta pay.

[Mitraparp Monkey]

How about Google Street View: Do they have a right to take pictures of your property and put it on the internet just because they take them from the street? To my knowledge not. They have to remove your property from the view, if you object.