[Linux-aus] Photography (was Re: Some Anti-Harassment Policies considered harmful)

[Ewen McNeill]

On 2011-02-19 15:52 , Paul Wayper wrote:
> [.... trimming context; read the thread if you haven't....]
> I understand people's desires not to be photographed.  But how much effort
> should the conference organisers go to to make sure everyone's desires are
> accommodated?

In most of the "being photographed" situations there is ample 
opportunity for the photographer to confirm that the photographee is 
consenting to being photographed (eg, most photographs outside crowd 
shots from a distance).  We can debate whether it should be "default 
deny" or "default permit".  But at the point that the photographee has 
fairly clearly expressed the desire not to be photographed -- such as 
described in the thread you were replying too -- it is at minimum rather 
inpolite to go on to take the photograph (and more so to make use of 
it).  And, I think, not unreasonable to expect the conference organisers 
to be asked to have a word with a photographer who repeatedly ignores 
photographees' wishes.  (Official conference photographer, or not.)

As a random data point, both "close up" photographs I recall of me at 
LCA conferences (by two different phtographers) were preceeded by an 
explicit (verbal) question as to whether I consented.  And one of them, 
with an auto-upload-to-flickr setup, included a warning that was a 
consent-to-automatic-publication.  As someone who used to really dislike 
being photographed, I found it quite pleasing that they asked in 
advance.  It also took all of a few seconds to ask and get consent.

As another random data point, several people whose photographs appeared 
on the Big Screen at the dinner expressed surprise at their photograph 
being used that way.  (At least some of it seemed to be in the context 
of the photography competition, which supposedly required those entering 
to have explicit model releases -- something that clearly wasn't done 
for those photographs.  But perhaps those ones were just displayed as 
random images-we-found-tagged-with-LCA rather than competition entries; 
it wasn't entirely clear.)

> There were vegans and
> vegetarians at the conference, but should the whole conference be vegan?

Interesting straw person you have there.

As someone with food restrictions, it would have been helpful if the 
dietary content of more of the conference meals had been more explicitly 
notified in advance (the Wednesday lunch notification was excellent, and 
I fended for myself; the notifications for the dinners... lacked useful 
detail, and I ended up making the wrong decisions both times, one wrong 
each way -- turns out I could have easily eaten at the PDNS, but didn't; 
and there was little I could eat at the main conference dinner, so I 
should have eaten elsewhere first).

But like no one is suggesting that no photographs at all be taken at the 
conference, no one is suggesting that the whole conference be vegan only 
either.  Just that people be respectful of others choices.

Ewen