| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/05/2007 02:31:43 PM · #151 |
If your personal, or religious views were of a disapproval of public, or photographs of nudity then perhaps viewing and voting on the nudity challenge may not be advised...
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:32:31 PM · #152 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by Gabriel:
To me, what should be avoided first is the possibility for DPC to be in legal trouble. |
First and foremost, regardless of whatever legality is involved, what we should all want is for the owners and management of DPC to NOT have *any* problem on their hands.
This is not a constitutional free speech, legal, or moral issue, it's a matter of common courtesy and consideration for your hosts and fellow photographers.
In my opinion it's up to *us*, as considerate photographers and members of this community to use discretion and common sense so as to not overstep the perception of propriety so that the DPC staff doesn't have to deal with the consequences of actions not of their own doing!
And if that means that a 16/17 year old photographer, or model, needs to wait 'til he/she is 18 to keep the essence of propriety, is that not merely a consideration issue?
It's not like this is censoring or giving someone a distinct disadvantage, I'm suggesting this as a voluntary effort to demonstrate the interest in doing what's best for our community at DPC.
Hey, I'm 51, at 17, you have the distinct advantage over me in that your eye is sharper and your hand is steadier......DAMMIT!.....8>)
Seriously, I have no interest, nor right, to meddle in your affairs and this opinion and $1.00 will get you a cup of coffee some places.
But in the interest of the challemge tomorrow, and the ones next year, would you consider maybe waiting to submit nudes 'til next year?
After all, there will always be a challenge here and there that someone else does have very real advantages, like those darn people in Iceland with Auroras and skyscapes in general.
As it is, if people only submit photographs of people over 18 taken by people over 18, someone may question them anyway, and if we are all pretty much in agreement that this consideration is reasonable, then that's one less worry for Site Council because we initiated it and abide by it on our own.
Is that a bad thing on any level?
If we are all working together to keep it on the up-and-up and establish amongst ourselves a high standard of ethics and behavior, there are no losers, AND.....you young and talented people have a chance once again to establish your interest in what's best for all involved and your ability to set examples for those yet to come.
My 12 year old should be joining the DPC ranks in late spring, and I'm counting on you that are our younger up-and-coming stars now to set the examples in skill, behavior, and graciousness so that she may be led by example.
Will you all consider that? |
thank you Jeb, i'm glad that someone else sees the importance of doing what is DPC's best interest. like i've been saying, i have no problem with what noisemaker did; but if this comesup in sue-happy america, DPC could be in deep. if this is allowed to persist, then some crazy american could very well try suing the pants off of DPC, and DPC is not strong enough to fight for herself. (you have to watch out for us americans, we like our loop holes)
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:36:59 PM · #153 |
OK, I going to make my closing arguments and rest my case.
About the model being under 18. DPC has made it's judgment on the legality of the nude photos. There is precedence that could show legal problems for DPC for hosting such images (even if it is art) and while a photo could be defended it is entirely subjective and could cause DPC at the minimal a lot of cash to defend. DPC ruled on this and it is over. No more debate.
DPC and the underage photographer: There is no legal precedence to show that DPC is in any way responsible for an underage photographer shooting nudes. It is my opinion that DPC does not need to take a stand on this. The very few cases that I have seen where a minor was being questioned for doing nude art, the minor won. Remember most child laws are gear toward prohibiting the exploitation of a minor. No written laws (as far as my research goes) show that a minor can not take nude photos. I rest my case.
Now onto a more personal note which does not involve DPC. Noisemaker, the legality of you shooting your g/f nude lies entirely in the jurisdiction of Canada. It has nothing to do with photography.
What is questioned is if it is legal for her to expose herself to you. Now here is what I do know:
1) Ignorance of the law is never a defense.
2) "For art" can be a defense, but that is very shaky ground and really too subjective to count on.
3) A digital file with EXIF info would be very incriminating evidence and prosecutors would jump all over it.
4) It is ALWAYS very expensive to defend one's self in court.
5) Compliance with the law is always a defense.
Please, and this doesn't concern DPC or myself, do the research before July. I'm sure your g/f has a future planned that does not include prison and/or being labeled as a sex offender. Do the research for her and make sure that no charges can be brought against her (on Lewd and Lascivious behavior) before you ask her to pose nude again (once she is 18).
Peace man, I wish you well. You have the talent, just be careful, for HER sake.
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:40:24 PM · #154 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
This is an international site. The concept of nudity is quite diverse from culture to culture.
So what do we exclude photography wise? should all women be required to have a burka? what about how in India bear feet was considered to be sensual. And how about in many cultures where everyone goes topless and they don't realize that's considered nudity?
Tough one....I will say that. |
Correction:
This is an American website with international users. The exclusion of photographs is based on the laws of the U.S. and Virginia, specifically, and nothing else. |
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:41:14 PM · #155 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
[shortened to express what im commenting on]
What is questioned is if it is legal for her to expose herself to you. Now here is what I do know:
1) Ignorance of the law is never a defense.
2) "For art" can be a defense, but that is very shaky ground and really too subjective to count on.
3) A digital file with EXIF info would be very incriminating evidence and prosecutors would jump all over it.
4) It is ALWAYS very expensive to defend one's self in court.
5) Compliance with the law is always a defense.
Please, and this doesn't concern DPC or myself, do the research before July. I'm sure your g/f has a future planned that does not include prison and/or being labeled as a sex offender. Do the research for her and make sure that no charges can be brought against her (on Lewd and Lascivious behavior) before you ask her to pose nude again (once she is 18).
Peace man, I wish you well. You have the talent, just be careful, for HER sake. |
i will eventulyl look into it but i really dont think its a problem. because in canada legal age for sex and all is 16. so she wouldnt be labeled as a sex offender. |
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:46:19 PM · #156 |
Originally posted by Ben:
If your personal, or religious views were of a disapproval of public, or photographs of nudity then perhaps viewing and voting on the nudity challenge may not be advised... |
But how are you to know you are looking at a nude image of a minor!
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:50:08 PM · #157 |
Originally posted by Artyste:
Correction:
This is an American website with international users. The exclusion of photographs is based on the laws of the U.S. and Virginia, specifically, and nothing else. |
Correct!
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:50:34 PM · #158 |
Originally posted by noisemaker:
i will eventulyl look into it but i really dont think its a problem. because in canada legal age for sex and all is 16. so she wouldnt be labeled as a sex offender. |
Age of consent doesn't jive with age of majority (adulthood), however. You have to be an adult to pose nude regardless of the age of consent. (In the US, at least, and to my knowledge Canada must comply the same way or face trade sanctions or what have you. Long lost memory from school.)
I suggest that you look up your territory's child pornography laws, because while SHE may not be labeled a sex offender, YOU could be for taking the photos. Your age is likely not a defense in that situation.
For reference consider a recent case in the US where two 15 year olds were caught having sex. They were both charged with Statutory Rape and Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor, and they both had to register as sex offenders. (I may have the actual charges wrong as I can't find the news story right now, but that was the outcome.)
It's being heavily contested because how can you be the perpetrator and victim of the same crime, but that's how the law works. |
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:50:40 PM · #159 |
Irrelevant if your views are relating to nudes in general.
And if you're talking about people's morals on viewing images a 'minor' then they can miss the challenge completely, or just move on if you see an image you don't like. Not that things are ever that simple in the real world.
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:51:46 PM · #160 |
I have struggled to read through this and keep my mouth shut.
It has been mentioned on more than one occasion in this thread about it being a multi-cultural site. That said, if there are to be rules these must be clearly stated referring to the site's home country. If there is legal age of 18 for consent in USA, then it must be stated as such.
European countries have different legal ages of consent and while the photog may be committing an offence in the US, they are not in their own country. How many people can hold their hand on their heart and state legal ages of consent in many of the countries that have members on DPC?
I may be going over old ground, but a waiver is no good unless the legalities of that country are stated, and an addition included to remind anyone about to submit to DPC that the only legal regulation allowed is the one for DPC, regardless of any other law in any other country.
Hope that makes some kind of sense. |
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:52:27 PM · #161 |
Originally posted by chimericvisions:
Originally posted by noisemaker:
i will eventulyl look into it but i really dont think its a problem. because in canada legal age for sex and all is 16. so she wouldnt be labeled as a sex offender. |
Age of consent doesn't jive with age of majority (adulthood), however. You have to be an adult to pose nude regardless of the age of consent. (In the US, at least, and to my knowledge Canada must comply the same way or face trade sanctions or what have you. Long lost memory from school.)
I suggest that you look up your territory's child pornography laws, because while SHE may not be labeled a sex offender, YOU could be for taking the photos. Your age is likely not a defense in that situation.
For reference consider a recent case in the US where two 15 year olds were caught having sex. They were both charged with Statutory Rape and Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor, and they both had to register as sex offenders. (I may have the actual charges wrong as I can't find the news story right now, but that was the outcome.)
It's being heavily contested because how can you be the perpetrator and victim of the same crime, but that's how the law works. |
how would i be labeled as a sex offender of taken a photo of someone 18? |
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:54:19 PM · #162 |
Originally posted by chimericvisions:
I suggest that you look up your territory's child pornography laws, because while SHE may not be labeled a sex offender, YOU could be for taking the photos. Your age is likely not a defense in that situation.
|
Just to clarify, the note was based on the assumption the photos are taken after her 18th birthday in July. Where she will be 18 and he will be under 18. My only point of concern is "Lewd and Lascivious" behavior charges toward her.
Message edited by author 2007-02-05 14:54:54.
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:55:36 PM · #163 |
Originally posted by noisemaker:
how would i be labeled as a sex offender of taken a photo of someone 18? |
I was in reference to now, not later. fotomann was talking about later, not now.
Confusion. |
|
|
|
02/05/2007 02:58:03 PM · #164 |
Originally posted by chimericvisions:
I was in reference to now, not later. fotomann was talking about later, not now. |
Yes, I think the past is done, I'm looking out for his future :-)
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 03:00:32 PM · #165 |
Originally posted by chimericvisions:
Originally posted by noisemaker:
how would i be labeled as a sex offender of taken a photo of someone 18? |
I was in reference to now, not later. fotomann was talking about later, not now.
Confusion. |
i was talking about later :P
i know about now. this whole thread isnt suppossed to be about what if i photographed underage models. this thread is about if i was photographing legal age nudes!
but everyone keeps on mentioning underage models which i feel is over and dealt with as i agree DPC should DQ all underage nudes. but the whole point of this is to get opinions of what people thought of underage photographers taking photos of legal age people.
i personally think the laws are stretched a bit much to censor young adults but we've had a lot of discussion and opinions on that but then people still started mentioning underage models. |
|
|
|
02/05/2007 03:06:47 PM · #166 |
Originally posted by noisemaker:
...the whole point of this is to get opinions of what people thought of underage photographers taking photos of legal age people...
|
i think it's risky business. there are too many laws out there designed to protect the youth, and i'm sure the "Lewd and Lascivious" laws will be brought up by people outside of here...other than the whole law topic, i'm fine by it.
Message edited by author 2007-02-05 15:07:35.
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 03:08:12 PM · #167 |
Originally posted by chimericvisions:
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
If a 16 year old can get into an R-rated movie with an 18+ escort, then there's no reason a 16 year old shouldn't be able to shoot an 18+ nude model with parental consent. |
Actually, a 16 year old can't get into an R movie without an adult. Not legally, anyway. That, however is specifically due to sexual content, language, and violence. |
That's what I said. They have an escort, it's fine. Why should the same not apply to underage photogs?
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 03:08:22 PM · #168 |
Originally posted by Muppet:
Originally posted by noisemaker:
...the whole point of this is to get opinions of what people thought of underage photographers taking photos of legal age people...
|
i think it's risky business. there are too many laws out there designed to protect the youth, and i'm sure the "Lewd and Lascivious" laws will be brought up by people outside of here...other than the whole law topic, i'm fine by it. |
ill need to look into what our good ol' laid back B.C Canadian laws say! |
|
|
|
02/05/2007 03:09:13 PM · #169 |
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
Originally posted by chimericvisions:
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
If a 16 year old can get into an R-rated movie with an 18+ escort, then there's no reason a 16 year old shouldn't be able to shoot an 18+ nude model with parental consent. |
Actually, a 16 year old can't get into an R movie without an adult. Not legally, anyway. That, however is specifically due to sexual content, language, and violence. |
That's what I said. They have an escort, it's fine. Why should the same not apply to underage photogs? |
and plus this is kind of on topic, i get into R movies alll the time and dont get I.D'd.
..i think its my beard :P :) |
|
|
|
02/05/2007 03:12:14 PM · #170 |
Originally posted by noisemaker:
Originally posted by Muppet:
Originally posted by noisemaker:
...the whole point of this is to get opinions of what people thought of underage photographers taking photos of legal age people...
|
i think it's risky business. there are too many laws out there designed to protect the youth, and i'm sure the "Lewd and Lascivious" laws will be brought up by people outside of here...other than the whole law topic, i'm fine by it. |
ill need to look into what our good ol' laid back B.C Canadian laws say! |
Yes, you do and for the whole point of the convo are the only laws that you need to worry about. If it is legal for her to expose herself to you in B.C. Canada, everything is good to go.
*Still assuming the photos are taken AFTER she is 18.
Message edited by author 2007-02-05 15:13:03.
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 03:14:59 PM · #171 |
Originally posted by noisemaker:
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
Originally posted by chimericvisions:
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
If a 16 year old can get into an R-rated movie with an 18+ escort, then there's no reason a 16 year old shouldn't be able to shoot an 18+ nude model with parental consent. |
Actually, a 16 year old can't get into an R movie without an adult. Not legally, anyway. That, however is specifically due to sexual content, language, and violence. |
That's what I said. They have an escort, it's fine. Why should the same not apply to underage photogs? |
and plus this is kind of on topic, i get into R movies alll the time and dont get I.D'd.
..i think its my beard :P :) |
Off-topic but funny - I was ID'd for an R movie when I was 28.
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 03:15:50 PM · #172 |
Originally posted by noisemaker:
ill need to look into what our good ol' laid back B.C Canadian laws say! |
as long as your laws are fine by it, then feel free to do so, but DPC abides under a different set of laws, and unfortunately, that presents a problem for your posting such pics on this site. you'll probably have to wait to do so till later. either way, just find out what Canadian laws say about your photoshoots, and if it's ok by them, then have fun.
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 03:22:17 PM · #173 |
I am quite certain that in Canada, it is very much illegal to create or possess nude images of someone under the age of 18. Age of consent applies to sex, not pornography.
edit: apparently. not true. my own research contradicts this several posts later...
Message edited by author 2007-02-05 15:30:16.
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 03:23:59 PM · #174 |
Originally posted by Muppet:
Originally posted by noisemaker:
ill need to look into what our good ol' laid back B.C Canadian laws say! |
as long as your laws are fine by it, then feel free to do so, but DPC abides under a different set of laws, and unfortunately, that presents a problem for your posting such pics on this site. you'll probably have to wait to do so till later. either way, just find out what Canadian laws say about your photoshoots, and if it's ok by them, then have fun. |
Let me state one more time that there is no legal precedence that supports that it is illegal for him (a minor in the US) to post (or for DPC to host) nudes of 18+ y/o models. DPC should have no concern of the photog's age, only that of the model.
|
|
|
|
02/05/2007 03:24:34 PM · #175 |
dont want to take you DPC'ers thread of topic (not sure if I am) but I got a question about this topic..
So my little brother  digitaljt was recently given a camera from a fellow DPC'er here and now has an account so I was up late last night I saw the recent nude challenge and I wondered if he had access to them. So I logged into his account and although they were not showing the thumbnails I could easily click on the non-showing thumbnails and see the picture/s. So my question is.. Is there any way to hide his access to these? I dont want him looking through them and his mom does not approve and catches him looking at nudes.
|
|
