Jump to content
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 2383 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

Dear friends,

In the past I have been photographing, which I have recently picked up again using Flickr. I enjoy taking time out to take photographs of avatars. In particular random non-posed shots. Recently a friend invited me to a moderate club she works at. This club had a lot of avatars with pretty skins. They have to earn money so they put effort and lindens into refining their avatar characteristics, unlike a lot of recreational avatars. The club has no rules on parts of photography and appears to be keep a public regiment.

Pictures taken there, are within decency. They show no nudity at all. They are mainly pictures of faces, some showing their clothes too. Again: no nudity. Most pictures are within bounds of general content, as they are not taken from a sexually tainted perspective nor do they reflect this. Most of the people that have visited my Flickr agree with this on me.

Anyways to get to my question: lately I have been receiving multiple threats and warrants, with the demand I take their avatars pictures down. The threats include destroying my business, IRL lawsuits and what not. I do not take them serious as-in the degree they say they will, considering they are only dancers and I doubt will sue me over 4-5 pictures on Flickr. Either way, I profit not from anything I post on Flickr and post them only out of hobbyism. What are my rights in extend of keeping and displaying the pictures?

What is the context of "privacy" which was thrown at me in one of the accusations? I've told them off by letting them know it is not me but them, whom signed up to work in a public, photography allowing club. If I have been unjust by this determination, I would like to find out and correct myself to my unintentionally inflicted "victims". I take a lot of time in taking and processing these shots, taking them down would mean I would have to empty my Flickr (I have around 70 pictures of random avatars across the grid).

On a side note: none of the avatars on the pictures are mentioned or tagged with their name in SL. The pictures show nothing that could identify the club and allow people to trace them down. They are merely faded-background shots with avatar appearances.

Thank you in advance for anyone reading this. I hope someone has an answer to this matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Drake1 Nightfire wrote: Stefanosje Sellers wrote: Monti Messmer wrote: According to the second part, i wouldn´t say you can use their names and the part of "recognizable", even without the n

You should point then at that ToS section and ask them to point out which bit they feel you are in breach of.   Or you could just tell them that they are "talking out of their arse"   Pick one o

Contact the owner of the club and ask what is their opinion about you posting photos taken in their club? Be smart and point to the fact that your photos could be a promotion to their venue (even if y


Sassy Romano wrote:

Read the ToS section on machinima.

 

It's explained there.

Dear Sassy,

 

You're always present to come at help for those in need aren't you?! smiles.

I've looked into the ToS once more (Linden wiki) and found the following:

 

 

(a) Land Owner Consent for Snapshots and Machinima

If you wish to take a snapshot or capture machinima of content on another Resident’s land, then:

  1. For Snapshots, check whether the covenant for the land prohibits snapshots. If it does, then you need special permission from the land owner to take the snapshot. If it allows snapshots or doesn’t address them, then you do not need special permission from the land owner as long as you comply with any terms that may be in the covenant.
  2. For Machinima, check whether the covenant for the land allows machinima. If it does not or doesn’t address machinima, then you need special permission from the land owner to capture machinima. If it allows machinima, then you do not need special permission from the land owner as long as you comply with any terms that may be in the covenant.

For Mainland or Linden Homes parcels where Linden Lab is the estate owner, you do not need land owner consent to take snapshots, but you do need special permission from the land owner to capture machinima. The “land owner” is not the estate owner, but the Resident identified as the land owner in the “General” tab under “About Land.” For private islands where Residents are estate owners, you must check the covenant for the private island as provided above.

(b) Avatar Consent for Machinima

For machinima, you must have the consent of all Residents whose avatars or Second Life names are featured or recognizable in the machinima. This includes avatars who are featured in a shot, avatars whose names are legible, and avatars whose appearance is sufficiently distinctive that they are recognizable by members of the Second Life community. Consent is not required if an avatar is not recognizable and is merely part of a crowd scene or shown in a fleeting background. Consent is not required for any snapshots.

 

If I have read this correctly (English is not my native language, let alone LL law-talk), I am in my right to create snapshots of avatars using snapshots without consent, as long as I stick to the land/venues rules and convenant?

Thus is exactly what I have done. According to this ToS, I would even be allowed to mention their names, which I have not done out of sincere privacy respects. Can I conclude these people are pushing it too far, and are not aware of the rules their own club has set in concerns to protecting their members to their privacy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the second part, i wouldn´t say you can use their names and the part of "recognizable", even without the nametag showing, is a tricky one.

RL photographers know about this funny law, it´s exact same there just no one has a nametag or walks around as a giant furry ;-)

If the main part of your picture shows a crowd of people in a public venue, without focussing on single avatars, that should be safe.

Monti

Link to post
Share on other sites


Monti Messmer wrote:

According to the second part, i wouldn´t say you can use their names and the part of "recognizable", even without the nametag showing, is a tricky one.

RL photographers know about this funny law, it´s exact same there just no one has a nametag or walks around as a giant furry ;-)

If the main part of your picture shows a crowd of people in a public venue, without focussing on single avatars, that should be safe.

Monti

Hi Monti,

I'm partially aware of the real laws to photography and the requirement of handling the people present in the picture. However I am going to stick with the Linden Lab rules, as this is the environment the picture was taken in, and Flickr only serves as a displaying utility. 

The way I read the ToS is that LL has made a clear distinction between Machinima (video) and snapshots (pictures). They seem to free-ward all rights on snapshots, which pretty much leaves no boundaries other than following sim/land covenants.

What is your call on this? As with many LL regulations it creates a lot of controversy and room for different "interpretations". 

Stef

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that´s true but! offended people (or only if they feel so) can do alot harm to you or just cause major pain/troubles.

You cannot name avatars on the official forums but outside you can do whatever you feel. We had some big drama going on even stick to that rules 100%.

My rule is never use names no matter where  and if someone asks to remove the picture i just blurr their faces. Works perfect in RL so should do for SL. This way you can keep the pictures online without destroy them.

After all the years on SL (avoiding other social media platforms like the pest) i learned to only have the good drama ;-)

Monti

Link to post
Share on other sites


Monti Messmer wrote:

Yes that´s true but! offended people (or only if they feel so) can do alot harm to you or just cause major pain/troubles.

You cannot name avatars on the official forums but outside you can do whatever you feel. We had some big drama going on even stick to that rules 100%.

My rule is never use names no matter where  and if someone asks to remove the picture i just blurr their faces. Works perfect in RL so should do for SL. This way you can keep the pictures online without destroy them.

After all the years on SL (avoiding other social media platforms like the pest) i learned to only have the good drama ;-)

Monti

Hi Monti,

 

Sensible advice! It's within my decency to remove pictures based on the desire of not having their avatar on a page they have no control of. However A part of my picture library consist of pictures from one specific area. Meaning I would lose 1/3rd of all my photographs. I strongly feel an arrangement should come from the club's management, which in the end of the day is responsible for the protection and boundaries of their workers.

At this point I have already upped to one of the dancers, I won't mind taking them down if they consider doing a little contribution to the loss of content I would have, including some upload costs made when some of the subjects in my pictures wanted the images for in-world use such as profiles. Which is something I feel is more than appropriate of me, to be flexible with their policy and have understanding for the moral objections.

At least now I know it is 90% sure, I was in my legal right to take these pictures. Which sets me free from the "I WILL HAVE YOU ARRESTED IRL!"-aggro thrown at me. I will contact their manager and see if there is a civil way out of this. Else, as you mentioned, I may make some parody from this and give them a criminal "eyebar" sensor and reupload them as such. I can appreciate a little humor.

Thank you for your care and reading.

Stef.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Sassy Romano wrote:

You should point then at that ToS section and ask them to point out which bit they feel you are in breach of.

 

Or you could just tell them that they are "talking out of their arse"

 

Pick one of the above, both work.

For maximum effect, Stefanosje could tell them he's going to photograph them talking out of their arse.

That'll show 'em!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Contact the owner of the club and ask what is their opinion about you posting photos taken in their club? Be smart and point to the fact that your photos could be a promotion to their venue (even if you did not bother to submit them to any groups or got any significant number of views/comments/favorites). 

I would consider using more polite words in the description - mentioning a manager's a$$ is not really polite. I didn't look further than first few photos but there is one question that bothers me, did they really got offended just because you posted these photos or you did something else? It looks like there is another side of the story that needs to be listened too.

In general, you need to check in "About land" section to see do they forbid snapshots on a certain parcel, if not you can freely take snapshots and post them. But, as someone already said, it is wise not to get yourself involved in drama and if a person is asking you to take down something, do it. Its not like you can't go to some other place and take more photos, right?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites


Madelaine McMasters wrote:


Sassy Romano wrote:

You should point then at that ToS section and ask them to point out which bit they feel you are in breach of.

 

Or you could just tell them that they are "talking out of their arse"

 

Pick one of the above, both work.

For maximum effect, Stefanosje could tell them he's going to photograph them talking out of their arse.

That'll show 'em!

ON POINT! Hahahahaha. Chuckled. On a serious note though. I do respect their point of view, just their approach is wrong and if they are so paranoïd about appearing in pictures, they need to consider finding a more secluded/private club. It's like taking a **bleep** in the park and complaining that people are looking at your naked butthole.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Tamara Artis wrote:

Contact the owner of the club and ask what is their opinion about you posting photos taken in their club? Be smart and point to the fact that your photos could be a promotion to their venue (even if you did not bother to submit them to any groups or got any significant number of views/comments/favorites). 

I would consider using more polite words in the description - mentioning a manager's a$$ is not really polite. I didn't look further than first few photos but there is one question that bothers me, did they really got offended just because you posted these photos or you did something else? It looks like there is another side of the story that needs to be listened too.

In general, you need to check in "About land" section to see do they forbid snapshots on a certain parcel, if not you can freely take snapshots and post them. But, as someone already said, it is wise not to get yourself involved in drama and if a person is asking you to take down something, do it. Its not like you can't go to some other place and take more photos, right?

Dear Tamara,

I agree with your point on politeness. I have thusfar stayed professional and controlled in my answers despite their aggro. I have spoken with one of the managers previously when I was taking pictures (timelapsed over various days). She said it was fine. The rules and land don't prohibit it either. It appears to be coming from individuals out of personal morale.

On notes of "something else", I can assure you the posting of the pictures has been the only part of the conflict. An e-mail I received (offline IM):

"You are violating my privacy outside of sl. You are rude. I will warn everyone about you.  You are disrespecting me, my sl and my rl. I did not ask you to take them. I will pursue this with Flickr and LL who does suggest you ask permission. You did not. You do not even know me. You are an ugly rude little man. Its my image, my avatar, not your property. Rude, rude, rude, rude, rude. You did not spend any time. You snapped them in the club. Liar, liar, liar."

Link to post
Share on other sites


Stefanosje Sellers wrote:


Madelaine McMasters wrote:


Sassy Romano wrote:

You should point then at that ToS section and ask them to point out which bit they feel you are in breach of.

 

Or you could just tell them that they are "talking out of their arse"

 

Pick one of the above, both work.

For maximum effect, Stefanosje could tell them he's going to photograph them talking out of their arse.

That'll show 'em!

ON POINT! Hahahahaha. Chuckled. On a serious note though. I do respect their point of view, just their approach is wrong and if they are so paranoïd about appearing in pictures, they need to consider finding a more secluded/private club. It's like taking a **bleep** in the park and complaining that people are looking at your naked butthole.

I agree. You could inform the club owner of the relevant clauses in the TOS. They might respond by altering the land covenant to forbid photography, but that would be a self harming act. Who wants to go to a place where one couldn't take a snapshot if something memorable happened?

As for individual avatars getting their undies in a bundle over being photographed, show them the TOS as well. Then recommend that, if they truly don't want to be photographed, the only effective recourse they have is to wear a full body alpha. You can't photograph what the camera can't see.

You might also ask them if they've ever taken a photograph of another avatar in SL without asking permission. If so, why all the  hypocrisy? This may not help the situation, but the feeling of moral superiority it produces is pleasant.

;-).

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites


Sassy Romano wrote:

The dramatainment is strong in that one!

 

Words don't really describe the sheer pettyness of it on their part.

Well, Sassy; if I was exhibiting pictures of adult form (I have some, which I did make with a conscent) I would have deleted them at instant. Simply because I can imagine if one has a business it could be potentially harmful. This doesn't make it any more logical that they are in a public club rather than a private "premium" club, but would allow me to have more understanding. The girls that are complaining in particular, have been displayed in upmost decency. Pictures that could be shown to children essentially. I don't see the big issue, unless they are hiding something from their partners or any monkey business in such category..

I have tried explaining this and communicating in civil ways. Should this be a case of "some people just are a little off"? I'm worried I may be the bad wolve in this, and I myself like to keep a clean reputation myself.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Madelaine McMasters wrote:


Stefanosje Sellers wrote:


Madelaine McMasters wrote:


Sassy Romano wrote:

You should point then at that ToS section and ask them to point out which bit they feel you are in breach of.

 

Or you could just tell them that they are "talking out of their arse"

 

Pick one of the above, both work.

For maximum effect, Stefanosje could tell them he's going to photograph them talking out of their arse.

That'll show 'em!

ON POINT! Hahahahaha. Chuckled. On a serious note though. I do respect their point of view, just their approach is wrong and if they are so paranoïd about appearing in pictures, they need to consider finding a more secluded/private club. It's like taking a **bleep** in the park and complaining that people are looking at your naked butthole.

I agree. You could inform the club owner of the relevant clauses in the TOS. They might respond by altering the land covenant to forbid photography, but that would be a self harming act. Who wants to go to a place where one couldn't take a snapshot if something memorable happened?

As for individual avatars getting their undies in a bundle over being photographed, show them the TOS as well. Then recommend that, if they truly don't want to be photographed, the only effective recourse they have is to wear a full body alpha. You can't photograph what the camera can't see.

You might also ask them if they've ever taken a photograph of another avatar in SL without asking permission. If so, why all the  hypocrisy? This may not help the situation, but the feeling of moral superiority it produces is pleasant.

;-).

 

After the first reply or so from Sassy, I have informed the plaintives with the ToS. I haven't received any reply since. Just now I found out, the one from the e-mail I posted, is actually one of the 8+ "managers". One of the lower ranked officers (they are headed by officers, GM, owners). I think this club in particular has a loose end on behalf of management and have ran out of hand over time. Which now creates chaos as soon as decisions need to be made and/or something that doesn't have a written 1-2-3-step procedure ready.

May have been a bit of bad luck on my side. Any other club would have handled this adjacently instead of starting a massive boycot against the photographer.

Edit:

 

 

The big irony of this story, boycot, aggry and harassment towards my door: follower count = 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And the story entails with slander:

"Learn manners. I will be putting a warning in my picks regarding your lack of respect for people trying to enjoy their sl.  The fact that you are such a huge **bleep**ing **bleep**, tormenting others with no regard for the issues they are struggling  with in rl speaka volumes about your character.  Your actions have violated my second life."

I have now pretty much told her that if she will continue to slander me, I will post her full name on Flickr with a justificating description about how I'm not wrong in any way. I have also told her that her continious victim behavior and her pulling out the "violated" term, is an insult to all women whom have actually fallen victim to worse things. Such as stalkers, loverboys and even rapist they met via SL. She needs to grow the hell up, I included if she doesn't wish to be photographed in a public scene: she should either wear a burqa and following the Islamic heritage of leaving a woman's appearance to the husband and Allah. Or stop visiting moderate clubs instead.

This person is crazy and I am at snapping point. Good time for me to leave office and blow off steam on the trainride home.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Stefanosje Sellers wrote:

And the story entails with slander:

"
Learn manners. I will be putting a warning in my picks regarding your lack of respect for people trying to enjoy their sl.  The fact that you are such a huge **bleep**ing **bleep**, tormenting others with no regard for the issues they are struggling  with in rl speaka volumes about your character.  Your actions have violated my second life."

I have now pretty much told her that if she will continue to slander me, I will post her full name on Flickr with a justificating description about how I'm not wrong in any way. I have also told her that her continious victim behavior and her pulling out the "violated" term, is an insult to all women whom have actually fallen victim to worse things. Such as stalkers, loverboys and even rapist they met via SL. She needs to grow the hell up, I included if she doesn't wish to be photographed in a public scene: she should either wear a burqa and following the Islamic heritage of leaving a woman's appearance to the husband and Allah. Or stop visiting moderate clubs instead.

This person is crazy
and I am at snapping point. Good time for me to leave office and blow off steam on the trainride home.

And the thing I would like in real life, that I would definitely use on this one in Second Life, is the mute/block feature. 

Second Life - like Topic - a (hazel) nut in every byte.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Marigold Devin wrote:


Stefanosje Sellers wrote:

And the story entails with slander:

"
Learn manners. I will be putting a warning in my picks regarding your lack of respect for people trying to enjoy their sl.  The fact that you are such a huge **bleep**ing **bleep**, tormenting others with no regard for the issues they are struggling  with in rl speaka volumes about your character.  Your actions have violated my second life."

I have now pretty much told her that if she will continue to slander me, I will post her full name on Flickr with a justificating description about how I'm not wrong in any way. I have also told her that her continious victim behavior and her pulling out the "violated" term, is an insult to all women whom have actually fallen victim to worse things. Such as stalkers, loverboys and even rapist they met via SL. She needs to grow the hell up, I included if she doesn't wish to be photographed in a public scene: she should either wear a burqa and following the Islamic heritage of leaving a woman's appearance to the husband and Allah. Or stop visiting moderate clubs instead.

This person is crazy
and I am at snapping point. Good time for me to leave office and blow off steam on the trainride home.

And the thing I would like in real life, that I would definitely use on this one in Second Life, is the mute/block feature. 

Second Life - like Topic - a (hazel) nut in every byte.

Heya Mari. I agree on parts of grief. However, if this person is furtherly trying to harm my reputation by contacting business partners or other parties that are connected to me, I need to know. Thus why I was doubting whether not to block her. At least now, I have been able to find out what she has been doing, and screenshotted all her slander and "defaming" as LL terms it. Which served me greatly in the report I have just filed against her.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Stefanosje Sellers wrote:

 

if this person is furtherly trying to harm my reputation by contacting business partners or other parties that are connected to me, I need to know.


No you don't, just ignore it.  Let it go, nothing will happen and if I weren't stuck on some retarded US service that believes that gambling will burn babies eyes out, i'd put a bet on it that nothing bad will happen either to you or your business.

Some people just like to play the dramatainment card and that's their entirety in SL.  Seems this person is one of them. 

IGNORE!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not the first time I have heard of insanity like this.

I'd be tempted to take and post even more pictures of this person.

But we know you don't want the idiocy to escalate.

Some people take privacy to insane limits.

The minute any one steps into the line of sight of another person they have surrendered their privacy.

You've done nothing wrong here.

If someone doesn't like that LL has given us the ability to take snap shots which also includes the (gasp) danger of having our picture taken what they should do is Log Out and go hide in a closet.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Perrie Juran wrote:

This is not the first time I have heard of insanity like this.

I'd be tempted to take and post even more pictures of this person.

But we know you don't want the idiocy to escalate.

Some people take privacy to insane limits.

The minute any one steps into the line of sight of another person they have surrendered their privacy.

You've done nothing wrong here.

If someone doesn't like that LL has given us the ability to take snap shots which also includes the (gasp) danger of having our picture taken what they should do is Log Out and go hide in a closet.

 

Lmao!

Link to post
Share on other sites


Stefanosje Sellers wrote:


Monti Messmer wrote:

According to the second part, i wouldn´t say you can use their names and the part of "recognizable", even without the nametag showing, is a tricky one.

RL photographers know about this funny law, it´s exact same there just no one has a nametag or walks around as a giant furry ;-)

If the main part of your picture shows a crowd of people in a public venue, without focussing on single avatars, that should be safe.

Monti

Hi Monti,

I'm partially aware of the real laws to photography and the requirement of handling the people present in the picture.
However I am going to stick with the Linden Lab rules, as this is the environment the picture was taken in, and Flickr only serves as a displaying utility. 

No where in the Snapshot and Machinima policy does it say it is ok to take pictures of people. It specifially states 3D content which is defined as “3D content means any objects, primitives, or other creative works or works of authorship that are three dimensional."

The way I read the ToS is that LL has made a clear distinction between Machinima (video) and snapshots (pictures). They seem to free-ward all rights on snapshots, which pretty much leaves no boundaries other than following sim/land covenants.

What is your call on this? As with many LL regulations it creates a lot of controversy and room for different "interpretations". 

Stef

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Stefanosje Sellers wrote:


Madelaine McMasters wrote:


Sassy Romano wrote:

You should point then at that ToS section and ask them to point out which bit they feel you are in breach of.

 

Or you could just tell them that they are "talking out of their arse"

 

Pick one of the above, both work.

For maximum effect, Stefanosje could tell them he's going to photograph them talking out of their arse.

That'll show 'em!

ON POINT! Hahahahaha. Chuckled. On a serious note though. I do respect their point of view, just their approach is wrong and if they are so paranoïd about appearing in pictures, they need to consider finding a more secluded/private club.
It's like taking a **bleep** in the park and complaining that people are looking at your naked butthole.

Ah so it's the fault of the scanitliy clad women you are perving and taking pictures of. Got it. You strike me as that creepy guy at the playground with no kids but a zoom lens camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:


Stefanosje Sellers wrote:


Monti Messmer wrote:

According to the second part, i wouldn´t say you can use their names and the part of "recognizable", even without the nametag showing, is a tricky one.

RL photographers know about this funny law, it´s exact same there just no one has a nametag or walks around as a giant furry ;-)

If the main part of your picture shows a crowd of people in a public venue, without focussing on single avatars, that should be safe.

Monti

Hi Monti,

I'm partially aware of the real laws to photography and the requirement of handling the people present in the picture.
However I am going to stick with the Linden Lab rules, as this is the environment the picture was taken in, and Flickr only serves as a displaying utility. 

No where in the Snapshot and Machinima policy does it say it is ok to take pictures of people. It specifially states 3D content which is defined as “3D content means any objects, primitives, or other creative works or works of authorship that are three dimensional."

The way I read the ToS is that LL has made a clear distinction between Machinima (video) and snapshots (pictures). They seem to free-ward all rights on snapshots, which pretty much leaves no boundaries other than following sim/land covenants.

What is your call on this? As with many LL regulations it creates a lot of controversy and room for different "interpretations". 

Stef

 

(b) Avatar Consent for Machinima

For machinima, you must have the consent of all Residents whose avatars or Second Life names are featured or recognizable in the machinima. This includes avatars who are featured in a shot, avatars whose names are legible, and avatars whose appearance is sufficiently distinctive that they are recognizable by members of the Second Life community. Consent is not required if an avatar is not recognizable and is merely part of a crowd scene or shown in a fleeting background. Consent is not required for any snapshots.

 

That sorta says "it is ok to take pictures of people", doesn't it?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 2383 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...