PDA

View Full Version : Spinoff Video policy, BNT doesn't allow pictures to be taken



mademoiselle
Feb. 22, 2011, 08:20 AM
My friend has been training with a BNT for over a year (one lesson and 2 rides a week). Lately she has not been able to ride very often with said BNT but has made some progress with her horse and wanted BNT's assement on horse.

So she asked BNT to ride her horse.
Friend of friend is coming to the barn to take pictures of everybody that day. Friend gives a bath to her horse and made him extra pretty.
She asks BNT if it's Ok to take pictures for personal use. BNT says ok.

BNT rides horse. Easy, uncomplicated ride.

BNT emails friend and friend of friend that night and asks them in a fairly rude way to delete all the pictures.

I mean the trainer doesn't use any questionable methods or didn't go into any serious work that would create unflattering pictures.

Horse is not for sale and pictures where for personal use.

Is that normal practice ? If you pay somebody to ride your horse and you pay a big chunk of money and you are a regular client, why not let you take pictures of your horse :confused: ?
I don't get it.

alibi_18
Feb. 22, 2011, 08:34 AM
Are the pictures up on the net somewhere?

If yes, remove them quickly. Maybe the trainer doesn't want such publicity and be commented on his skills on different billboards.

If not, just keep them for yourself and tell BNT that he will never hear or see those pictures anywhere. Be cautious not to brag around with the pictures, thats all.

BUT I would probably be looking for another trainer. I can understand someone not wanting to have pictures of them all over the internet. But it is another thing to be rude about it, especially if the trainer had agreed in first
place...
Unless something triggered that sudden rude behavior?

Calhoun
Feb. 22, 2011, 10:15 AM
Although I don't think the trainer should have been rude (might be another side to this story), I can totally understand why he wouldn't want pictures on the internet. We've all seen awkward moments in pictures which were posted and went viral in horse chat rooms. Often the person riding the horse has not OK'd the photo (did the trainer see each photo?) and also does not have a chance to defend or explain. Money has nothing to do with this, it's about reputation and professionalism.

mademoiselle
Feb. 22, 2011, 10:40 AM
The pictures are not posted anywhere and friend was not planning on posting them anywhere. She wanted some nice pictures of her horse looking pretty and being well ridden.
She was planning on framing one of those and sent a couple to her friend who helped her to find the horse in Europe and show them to me, because we are really close and she let me ride her horse to get my bronze.

When friend asked for permission to take pictures she said she would not put them on Facebook or any internet websites.

The trainer sent the email in the evening after the ride.

Eclectic Horseman
Feb. 22, 2011, 10:57 AM
It's a violation of the "right of publicity." Sports figures (like BNTs) generate income by getting paid for the use of their picture. To protect this income, they do not allow anyone to get their picture for free.

Read about the legal basis here:

http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/using-name-or-likeness-another

Velvet
Feb. 22, 2011, 11:06 AM
BNT emails friend and friend of friend that night and asks them in a fairly rude way to delete all the pictures.



See line three of my signature. Honestly, they might not have meant to be rude, they might have just been taken off guard when seeing the pics online, etc., and had just emailed a blunt request (in their mind).

Get beyond the feelings that it was rude and look at the reasons. Maybe they don't mind you keeping them for your own purposes, but like many people (especially women) maybe they just hate their own pictures. Even when riding a horse. We're all our own worst critic and seeing it online and thinking others will be looking at them and remarking on them might have just sent them into a very insecure place.

You never know...

Since you had permission before taking the photos, keep them. You didn't do anything wrong, and as long as there not being used for anything nefarious nor for public display, you can use them. There was no contract and you have no obligation to delete them. Just keep them private.

mademoiselle
Feb. 22, 2011, 11:32 AM
THE PICTURES WERE NEVER POSTED ONLINE ANYWHERE.

BNT rode the horse mid afternoon. Owner gets home, goes out for diner. Gets back home to download pictures from camera to computer and gets email from trainer saying that she wants all the pictures to be deleted even for personal use (aka print and put in a frame). No explantion to why.

mademoiselle
Feb. 22, 2011, 11:36 AM
It's a violation of the "right of publicity." Sports figures (like BNTs) generate income by getting paid for the use of their picture. To protect this income, they do not allow anyone to get their picture for free.

Read about the legal basis here:

http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/using-name-or-likeness-another

OK so owner should have offered extra $ to hav e the right to take pictures. Didn't think about that. Ok could make sense.

Velvet
Feb. 22, 2011, 11:43 AM
Sorry, I thought they looked at them online (in a private format).

I still say to keep the photos. You had permission. You aren't doing anything wrong or bad with them. They were about the horse. Crop the person's head off and just keep the horse. :yes:

Then they can NEVER complain, even if they ever saw one of the photos somewhere, someday in the distant future. ;)

Seriously, as long as you do not make them public, they are your photos and you have the right to keep them. If the person were showing and you took photos you would absolutely have every right to do what you want with them. The photographer owns the photos and had verbal permission (not that it was even needed).

joiedevie99
Feb. 22, 2011, 12:17 PM
I'd email the trainer back and ask why.

Velvet
Feb. 22, 2011, 02:07 PM
I still say, "Off with her head!" :lol:

awolffphotog
Feb. 22, 2011, 09:10 PM
It's a violation of the "right of publicity." Sports figures (like BNTs) generate income by getting paid for the use of their picture. To protect this income, they do not allow anyone to get their picture for free.

Read about the legal basis here:

http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/using-name-or-likeness-another

So I haven't gone through that entire link, but it seems to apply to commercial use, which the OP is not doing. She's using them for personal purposes, no money gained. I'm assuming that this took place on the BNT's personal property, which does give him the right to choose whether he wants pictures taken of him or not. He's not in the public, where you don't have an expectation of privacy. I just find it odd that he backed out afterward. I don't know, replace his body with Mickey Mouse :) Or you can take out his body like those riderless horse advertisements I used to see. Can't remember the company - dewormer, maybe?

Your horse is your property and you have a right to photograph your horse. If you're on private property, you don't have a right to photograph him without his permission. That is my understanding, but I am not a lawyer. I would definitely ask for an explanation. It's possible he got burned in the past, but I would have hoped that they would have said that upfront.

vacation1
Feb. 22, 2011, 10:26 PM
Maybe he's Amish. ;)

Bethe Mounce
Feb. 23, 2011, 01:26 AM
Whoever this trainer is, has had second thoughts for some odd reason. I tend to comply with peoples' wishes, but I sure would want to know why. It seemed ok when the pics were taken and then all of a sudden it is not ok. Something is very strange........

Beentheredonethat
Feb. 23, 2011, 01:43 AM
It probably has nothing to do with you or this other person, so don't take it personally. Normally I would have no issue with this. But, I had a similar situation once, and the person ended up being a pyscho and using them to help do some really bad things in the long run. I'm not saying this has anything to do with you, but you can imagine what this trainer may have been through and what people have done to them--you get paranoid once you've encountered psychotic people. I get it. Don't take it personally.

Eclectic Horseman
Feb. 23, 2011, 08:56 AM
So I haven't gone through that entire link, but it seems to apply to commercial use, which the OP is not doing. She's using them for personal purposes, no money gained. I'm assuming that this took place on the BNT's personal property, which does give him the right to choose whether he wants pictures taken of him or not. He's not in the public, where you don't have an expectation of privacy. I just find it odd that he backed out afterward. I don't know, replace his body with Mickey Mouse :) Or you can take out his body like those riderless horse advertisements I used to see. Can't remember the company - dewormer, maybe?

Your horse is your property and you have a right to photograph your horse. If you're on private property, you don't have a right to photograph him without his permission. That is my understanding, but I am not a lawyer. I would definitely ask for an explanation. It's possible he got burned in the past, but I would have hoped that they would have said that upfront.

As we all know, digital photos can end up anywhere very easily these days. (cf. "sexting" photos.)

The "property right" in question doesn't apply to the horse or to the real estate. When we talk about the "property" to which the BNT has a right, it is her "likeness." As professional photographers should know, in all cases a written release or authorization form should be signed in which the person being photographed agrees to the photograph and to the specific purpose for which the photograph may be used or disseminated. Although the OP may have gotten permission to take the picture, my guess is that she did not get permission to send it to anyone else, so there is a problem right off the bat. Such a photo could end up anywhere (in an advertisment, for example) so permission should be obtained for a particular use. There is a good example of such a release form in the link that I posted.

AllWeatherGal
Feb. 23, 2011, 01:07 PM
The pictures are not posted anywhere and friend was not planning on posting them anywhere. She wanted some nice pictures of her horse looking pretty and being well ridden.
She was planning on framing one of those and sent a couple to her friend who helped her to find the horse in Europe and show them to me, because we are really close and she let me ride her horse to get my bronze.



Of course, I'm curious about the BNT's change of mind, too, but I think it's possible to separate the issues.

Select the photo(s) in which the horse looks prettiest and crop them to make the rider a non-issue (unless his boots are very distinctive) for the framed photo.

Alternatively, if you rode the horse to a Bronze, rewash, dress yourself up nice, and ride the horse pretty again :)

Velvet
Feb. 23, 2011, 01:44 PM
Really starting to wonder how BN this BNT is....

Sonoma City
Feb. 23, 2011, 02:18 PM
I would also write a polite email back asking why. I have probably written people quick emails that were interpreted as rude and not making a lot of sense, and would rather someone come ask me my rationale behind a statement as opposed to be offended by it and try to guess. There's a good chance it may have been misinterpreted or not come out how the BNT meant it to (although I'm an optimist like that). I've seen too many people get worked up about things that never should have been an issue to begin with, and most start in some form of writing (text, email, messenger, etc.). Good luck figuring it out!

Gestalt
Feb. 23, 2011, 04:15 PM
I find all this "pictures are property" to be very shaky. I could be parked on the road and take pictures of this trainer riding, post them on my blog and I don't see what he/she could do about it. I understand the pix were taken during a lesson. But unless you were using them to sell the horse or in some other way make money, what's the big deal?

And if my trainer was rude to me, I'd asked her for a meeting to discuss the situation.

nickers@dawn
Feb. 23, 2011, 04:19 PM
Maybe he's Amish. ;)

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

mademoiselle
Feb. 23, 2011, 08:26 PM
Friend decapited BNT :lol::winkgrin:
Problem solved ...

skykingismybaby1
Feb. 23, 2011, 08:31 PM
Decapitation is often a pretty solution.......just sayin

judybigredpony
Feb. 23, 2011, 08:46 PM
I worked for 10 years handling requests for documents to be copied for legal use.

The maker and taker of the record is the owner of the record..

Since the trainer gave permission at the time of the photo's and IS NOT the owner of the horse and was PAID for her time.
The Taker of the photo's owns them.

Since no copy right infringement, not public displayed i.e. internet or sale of or copies for distribution..BNT is SOL.

Keep, print frame enjoy..just don't publiclly display on webb or sell.

Like hey if you take a Photo of BNT @ a horse show..its your photo..!!

nhwr
Feb. 24, 2011, 07:11 PM
Decapitation is often a pretty solution.......just sayin for so many problems :lol:



Seriously, what judybigredpony said.

I would do as you like with the photos and just not bring it up again with BNT.

Eclectic Horseman
Feb. 25, 2011, 09:25 AM
for so many problems :lol:



Seriously, what judybigredpony said.

I would do as you like with the photos and just not bring it up again with BNT.


Right. Wait until she sues (if you can afford to defend...)

nhwr
Feb. 25, 2011, 10:42 AM
People can sue for any reason, you can't control that. But it is unlikely that BNT would sue over this because they are in the wrong.

If BNT gave her permission, photographer owns the pics.
If BNT didn't give her permission but was in public, photographer owns the pics.
If BNT didn't give permission and was at a private facility, photographer may still own the pics.

People are free to take pics of sports celebs without their permission. Its done all the time. There no problem with it. What people are not free to do is use anyone's photo likeness for commercial purposes without a release and/or compensation. But that isn't what's happening here.

If BNT wants to control what happens with the pics, BNT ought to buy the pics and the copyright from the photographer.

Pennywell Bay
Feb. 25, 2011, 10:48 AM
Apparently, he wants his soul back. ...

judybigredpony
Feb. 25, 2011, 11:34 AM
People are free to take pics of sports celebs without their permission. Its done all the time. There no problem with it. What people are not free to do is use anyone's photo likeness for commercial purposes without a release and/or compensation. But that isn't what's happening here.

Absolutely correct.....

Eclectic Horseman
Feb. 25, 2011, 01:16 PM
People can sue for any reason, you can't control that. But it is unlikely that BNT would sue over this because they are in the wrong.


I agree with your first sentence, but not your second.

Have you read the bestselling book "The Help?" Just heard on NPR: the author's brother had a nanny with a very similar name and physical description as one of the fictional characters in the book. Is the nanny suing? You betcha.

There is a reason for getting a release in writing. As I pointed out previously, in these times where a digital photo can end up online anywhere (check out the software called "picnik" that allows you to grab a photo that is online anywhere and edit it.) If the photo were to be used in an advertisement or for any commercial purpose OR if it cast the person in what they perceived as a "negative light" OR if it were doctored in any way, there would be a reasonable basis for a lawsuit.

raff
Feb. 25, 2011, 01:44 PM
I kind of see the trainers pov...within hours of the pics being taken they'd been sent to at least two other sets of people. Maybe the folks who helped find the horse and got sent the pics commented to him/her about them, who knows. Id be careful of alienating the trainer if your friend wants to stay with them really. What you can LEGALLY do isn't always what you SHOULD do.

Velvet
Feb. 25, 2011, 01:51 PM
Apparently, he wants his soul back. ...

I just spewed my mouthful of water all over my monitor on that one! :lol: :lol:

suzy
Feb. 25, 2011, 01:58 PM
Apparently, he wants his soul back. ...

Soul? What soul? He's a BNT. ;)

Velvet
Feb. 25, 2011, 02:26 PM
Soul? What soul? He's a BNT. ;)

Implying that to be a BNT you have to sell your soul?

*cogitating*

I'll buy that one. :D

awolffphotog
Mar. 2, 2011, 05:05 PM
I worked for 10 years handling requests for documents to be copied for legal use.

The maker and taker of the record is the owner of the record..

Since the trainer gave permission at the time of the photo's and IS NOT the owner of the horse and was PAID for her time.
The Taker of the photo's owns them.

Since no copy right infringement, not public displayed i.e. internet or sale of or copies for distribution..BNT is SOL.

Keep, print frame enjoy..just don't publiclly display on webb or sell.

Like hey if you take a Photo of BNT @ a horse show..its your photo..!!

You worded better what I was trying to get at. Thank you! I'm glad you confirmed my understanding, since often it gets confusing when there's private citizens and property (the horse, the barn, etc.) involved.

alibi_18
Mar. 2, 2011, 06:56 PM
I agree with your first sentence, but not your second.

Have you read the bestselling book "The Help?" Just heard on NPR: the author's brother had a nanny with a very similar name and physical description as one of the fictional characters in the book. Is the nanny suing? You betcha.

There is a reason for getting a release in writing. As I pointed out previously, in these times where a digital photo can end up online anywhere (check out the software called "picnik" that allows you to grab a photo that is online anywhere and edit it.) If the photo were to be used in an advertisement or for any commercial purpose OR if it cast the person in what they perceived as a "negative light" OR if it were doctored in any
way, there would be a reasonable basis for a lawsuit.

Your reference to a bestSELLER can't be applied to the OP's question. They are not selling the pictures.

And they are not displaying them on the net, not for a sale add nor a promotional stallion advertisement, therefore the BNT has
nothing to sue about.

Coppers mom
Mar. 2, 2011, 10:02 PM
Maybe he's had his pics posted on the wonderful world of COTH before. Once bitten, twice shy :lol:

Eclectic Horseman
Mar. 3, 2011, 10:51 AM
Your reference to a bestSELLER can't be applied to the OP's question. They are not selling the pictures.

And they are not displaying them on the net, not for a sale add nor a promotional stallion advertisement, therefore the BNT has
nothing to sue about.

OP has already "disseminated" the photos to two other people. Where will those people disseminate them?

It is not improbable that if the horse is for sale the photos will end up in the sale ad... OR that one of the people who has them will post the photos on COTH for a "critique."

Again, the BNT may have a commercial interest in her image that she could protect through litigation. Did the BNT give the OP permission to disseminate the photos electronically to third parties? Did she do it front of a witness or in writing? Believe me, people have sued for less...

As I recall, not long ago Anky VG sued over someone taking photos and publishing them along side an article which she felt "cast her in a negative light." If I was the OP's lawyer, I would advise her to ask the people to whom she disseminated the photos to delete them and to delete her own copies as well.

Velvet
Mar. 3, 2011, 10:53 AM
As I recall, not long ago Anky VG sued over someone taking photos and publishing them along side an article which she felt "cast her in a negative light."

SERIOUSLY doubting this supposed BNT is that big of a T. :lol: And as long as they weren't doing rollkur, I doubt that the pics would even be worth a discussion out here.

Eclectic Horseman
Mar. 3, 2011, 10:56 AM
SERIOUSLY doubting this supposed BNT is that big of a T. :lol: And as long as they weren't doing rollkur, I doubt that the pics would even be worth a discussion out here.


I know a few BNTs who take themselves just as seriously as AVG!!! Maybe even more so! ;)

nhwr
Mar. 3, 2011, 02:12 PM
Dissemination isn't an issue in the US, EH, if there is no commercial activity. The owner of the photos can do with them what they wish. BNT has nothing to say about it.

Laws may be different in Europe. The AvG pics were used by someone who wrote a book, had a website (commercial activities). They were using AvG's likeness without her permission to make their point and ($$).

Eclectic Horseman
Mar. 3, 2011, 02:34 PM
Dissemination isn't an issue in the US, EH, if there is no commercial activity. The owner of the photos can do with them what they wish. BNT has nothing to say about it.

Laws may be different in Europe. The AvG pics were used by someone who wrote a book, had a website (commercial activities). They were using AvG's likeness without her permission to make their point and ($$).

I beg to differ. Again see the link that I posted.

First paragraph. http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/using-name-or-likeness-another

nhwr
Mar. 3, 2011, 02:52 PM
I suggest you read it too. It makes my point.

But since BNT gave their permission originally, it is really irrelevant to OPs point.

Eclectic Horseman
Mar. 4, 2011, 09:18 AM
I suggest you read it too. It makes my point.

But since BNT gave their permission originally, it is really irrelevant to OPs point.


"Usually, people run into trouble in this area when they use someone's name or photograph in a commercial setting, such as in advertising or other promotional activities. But, some states also prohibit use of another person's identity for the user's own personal benefit, whether or not the purpose is strictly commercial. "

"Consent is a complete defense to a legal claim for misappropriation of name or likeness or violation of the right of publicity. When you gather information from or take photographs of an individual, it is a good practice to ask for consent to use the material on your website, blog, or other online platform. Make sure to get consent in writing whenever possible. "

Over and out.

Velvet
Mar. 4, 2011, 11:00 AM
Back to original topic...WHO CARES? Why does this person care?

And, as I first suggested, removing the head solves all the problems...and it appears this is what the OP did.