boingboing at January 30th, 2014 12:45 — #1
eksrae at January 30th, 2014 13:11 — #2
Before knocking on the door, my guess would have been Bill Watterson's house.
stephen_schenck at January 30th, 2014 13:23 — #3
An obvious exception would be a photo taken through the window of a private home even if taken from a public street.
I've always had trouble wrapping my head around this, and where the line is drawn. Is that just for a closed window, or an open window? If I'm standing on a balcony I'm fair game, but if I take one step back and close a sliding glass door, I'm certainly no less visible.
jardine at January 30th, 2014 13:31 — #4
madlibrarian at January 30th, 2014 13:31 — #5
I would have looked around the neighborhood for more of Calvin's handiwork.
dave_pease at January 30th, 2014 13:42 — #6
Saw the picture, thought someone had gotten creative with roadkill.
wearysky at January 30th, 2014 14:31 — #7
An interesting post - yes, the photographer stepped onto private property to get a closeup picture of the snowman, but I suppose you could have gotten the same photo if you took it from the street and cropped it.
I can't wait till my kids are old enough to do fun snowmen like this. As it is, I'll settle for getting a snowfall with some actual packing snow. So far, this year has not been particularly good for that.
jjsaul at January 30th, 2014 16:12 — #8
Great shot, nice story, and I'm glad to see the Whigs performing again. I think I first saw you at the Jockey Club, and that ages us both!
awjt at January 30th, 2014 17:39 — #9
If they have their front or back door open, I'm pretty sure that it's ok to fly a drone into their house and take all the shots you want.
crenquis at January 30th, 2014 17:50 — #10
How long have you been working for the NSA?
duncancreamer at January 30th, 2014 19:05 — #11
I was hoping they had put some messy food for raccoons in the mouth and that this was a live coon, eating. Ah, well, this is still great.
awjt at January 30th, 2014 19:13 — #12
That reminds me.
Section 215 says let me in.
teapot at January 30th, 2014 20:36 — #13
It's simple.. have permission to be in the place that you're photographing from and anything you can see from there is fair game.
thelibrarian at January 30th, 2014 22:09 — #14
I think this post nicely illustrates the difference between "legal" and "polite/friendly". In most countries with legal codes descended from English civil law (and many other countries too), it is legal to take and publish photos of what can reasonably* be seen without expectation of privacy from public land (with the exception of lewd/harassing photos) for artistic or journalistic purposes.
Thus, John would have been well within his rights to publish this photo here without permission from the Motz family, but it was polite and friendly, as always, to ask first.
* 'reasonably' generally means no special actions to circumvent privacy measures - e.g. it would be legal to take a photo of someone's yard over a 2-foot picket fence from the sidewalk, but not to use a ladder to take a photo over a 12-foot fence from the same sidewalk.
boingboing at February 4th, 2014 12:45 — #15
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.