FYI: Shooting without consent in Quebec

[sirius]

http://www.montrealmirror.com/2005/080405/news1.html

This is an issue I have seen discussed here often.

 

[triplefinger]

people gotta lighten up.

 

[Chaser]

Remind me to never go to Quebec.

 

[sirius]

In the article they mention that Quebec law is closely based on French law. Is there privacy laws restricting street photography in France? That would be ironic since so many of the greats made their name there.

Ooh, there are lots of famous photographers in his documentary. I bet that would be fascinating to watch!

 

[photogdave]

In the article they mention that Quebec law is closely based on French law. Is there privacy laws restricting street photography in France? That would be ironic since so many of the greats made their name there.

Ooh, there are lots of famous photographers in his documentary. I bet that would be fascinating to watch!

Under French law you may not take a photo of any person in any location at any time without their permission.
I learned this the hard way in Senegal when I actually got dragged into the village jail for making a photo with a person in it.
Long story short, I was only released after taking the negative film out of my camera and exposing it. (Luckily they didn't notice my second body with the slide film that I had actually been doing all the shooting with!)

 

[julianphotoart]

Drag me away. I proudly proclaim I am a scofflaw in Quebec. Ha! Has anyone ever written a thread on RFF about the insane Quebec laws re english-language signs?

 

[anselwannab]

Something else to make fun of the French for!

Only in France could you be sued for taking the picture of one of those punks burning the cars.

Mark

 

[Chaser]

It sounds like Quebec has a half assed attempt to make provisions for journalism...but does France have the same?

 

[Flow]

Everytime I go back home to Montreal I have to remind myself not to take too many pictures. And sometimes I don't even bother bringing my Leica when I walk around. In Montreal you are suppose to ask for permission even if you just wanted to have a souvenir photo with your friends in a restaurant. You may not take any photos without the restaurant's permission, and this was on the news on tv.

My friends were shocked how freely you can take pictures and nobody will mind when they came to visit me in Vancouver this summer. Especially when they were taking a picture of themselves in a restaurant, the waiter came but he did not stop us from taking photos, instead he asked "Do you want me to take a group picture of you guys together?" The were just SHOCKED! -_-;;;


Flow

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Something else to make fun of the French for!

Only in France could you be sued for taking the picture of one of those punks burning the cars.

That is a lot of bull****. You insecure French-bashers repeat this stupid lie out of context. Only bumpersticker one-liners work for you.

Also shows your great geographical knowledge. Quebec is not in France, just like Ireland isn't in Canada.

Research your own medieval laws; it isn't even fun to make fun of them. In some states if a person feels threatened by your camera, they can shoot and ask questions later. But I guess you can't make fun of that when you have a gun pointed at you.

Good day cowboys.

 

[wongyboi]

I think it was Nepal, that I recently read you cant shoot photos because journalism is banned by the mayor/emperor/president/miniter/leader.

You can but its risky.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

Defending freedom

Defending freedom

Sounds like just the human rights issue to start a preemptive war over... 😉

"Excelsior, you fathead!"
-Chris-

 

[David Murphy]

That is a lot of bull****. You insecure French-bashers repeat this stupid lie out of context. Only bumpersticker one-liners work for you.

Also shows your great geographical knowledge. Quebec is not in France, just like Ireland isn't in Canada.

Research your own medieval laws; it isn't even fun to make fun of them. In some states if a person feels threatened by your camera, they can shoot and ask questions later. But I guess you can't make fun of that when you have a gun pointed at you.

Good day cowboys.

I agree that this should not turn into some sort of diatribe against Quebec, the Quebecois, or the French. Quebec is not France and vice-versa (both are fabulous places to live and visit). In a lot of ways Quebec is a very traditional, conservative place and I think this law probably reflects that.

For Americans commenting here, remember the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution end at the border. There are large parts of the world where most people have never heard of, say, Thomas Jefferson or the concept of "freedom of speech", etc.

So cherish your rights if you have them, but accept the rest of the world is different and often prefers it that way.

Here in California they are passing laws to 'protect' celebrities from "paparazzi's". Celebrities, it seems, only want their photos taken under circumstances they approve of, thus need to clamp down rogue photographers. So Quebec is not alone in this.

 

[sunsworth]

Well first of all Quebec is not France, it's in a different country. Secondly Senegal is not France, it too is a different country, heck they're even on different continents! Sorry if this is a difficult concept for some to grasp.

Also I lived in Paris for a couple of years, spent my time taking street photographs and was _never_ stopped from taking photographs either by individuals or by police or officials.

 

[sirius]

Gabriel, are your comments are necessary? If you read the posts you would see that I asked if there are similar laws in France, which Quebec takes as a model in this issue according to the article being discussed. So, yes, we are talking about French law and Quebec in this thread. Why make acidic comments like that?

 

[Chaser]

I hope it didn't sound like I was France bashing. I am genuenly interested in what laws there are in France reguarding photography. But, I personally would not want to take a vacation, per say, and spend hard earned dollars somewhere that I cannot take photos.

I agree that this should not turn into some sort of diatribe against Quebec, the Quebecois, or the French. Quebec is not France and vice-versa (both are fabulous places to live and visit). In a lot of ways Quebec is a very traditional, conservative place and I think this law probably reflects that.

For Americans commenting here, remember the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution end at the border. There are large parts of the world where most people have never heard of, say, Thomas Jefferson or the concept of "freedom of speech", etc.

So cherish your rights if you have them, but accept the rest of the world is different and often prefers it that way.

Here in California they are passing laws to 'protect' celebrities from "paparazzi's". Celebrities, it seems, only want their photos taken under circumstances they approve of, thus need to clamp down rogue photographers. So Quebec is not alone in this.

 

[sunsworth]

As I say, I used to live in France and have visited many times. I have never had any problems taking photographs. It is not an issue.

 

[gelmir]

Something else to make fun of the French for!

Only in France could you be sued for taking the picture of one of those punks burning the cars.

Mark

Well, it did not take so long for the french bashin to start. Reading that simplistic kind of thing makes me sad but I actually really feel sorry for your ignorance.

As for the law in France, things are clear : you are not allowed to make commercial use of someone's image without his consent. I don't think the majority of you are professionnal photographers anyway. The intent of this law is to prevent situation like beeing recognisable in newspaper for example, if you don't want to.
Justice tends to be tolerant with journalism, especially when pictures deal with celibrities and politicians (you don't have to ask for an authorization), as long as privacy and dignity is respected.

I won't enter the discussion wheter it's good or bad. To come back to the case described in the article, I would not have liked to appear on the cover of a magazine if I have not even been informed about it.

Again that does not concern us, I think, just the professionnals.

Also I lived in Paris for a couple of years, spent my time taking street photographs and was _never_ stopped from taking photographs either by individuals or by police or officials.

Exactly. It's incredible some might think taking photos is forbidden in the street or even in a restaurant. It's unlikely you'll get bothered anywhere in France.

 

[Chaser]

Good to know... It sounds very similar to American law...at least as it stands now...In time it could change...Does anybody know if this is really a non issue in Quebec?

Well, it did not take so long for the french bashin to start. Reading that simplistic kind of thing makes me sad but I actually really feel sorry for your ignorance.

As for the law in France, things are clear : you are not allowed to make commercial use of someone's image without his consent. I don't think the majority of you are professionnal photographers anyway. The intent of this law is to prevent situation like beeing recognisable in newspaper for example, if you don't want to.
Justice tends to be tolerant with journalism, especially when pictures deal with celibrities and politicians (you don't have to ask for an authorization), as long as privacy and dignity is respected.

I won't enter the discussion wheter it's good or bad. To come back to the case described in the article, I would not have liked to appear on the cover of a magazine if I have not even been informed about it.

Again that does not concern us, I think, just the professionnals.



Exactly. It's incredible some might think taking photos is forbidden in the street or even in a restaurant. It's unlikely you'll get bothered anywhere in France.

 

[Andrew Sowerby]

My understanding of the Aubrey case is that it was based on the Quebec Charter of Human Rights protection of one's private life (section 5 here). I think that the fellow in the linked article stated the law correctly: in Quebec people have rights concerning the publication of their image. As for what the caselaw is on the definition of publication, I'm not sure. I imagine that the internet counts.

The decision of the Supreme Court of Canada remains good law until another case is heard by them on the same matter or until the government of Quebec repeals that section of the Charter. Either is extremely unlikely.