I always keep a copy of NYPD Operations Order 14 in my camera bag, just in case:
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Kim Mosley <mrkimmosley@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The court of appeals ruled on the statute of limitations issue, not on the free speech issue. Also, this is a decision for NY, not for the USA. And a book cover is different than a photograph in a gallery.In November 2007, the New York Court of Appeals- the state's highest court - affirmed the victory for diCorcia. The Court of Appeals limited its opinion to the timeliness issue, holding for the first time that claims under New York privacy law must be brought within one year after first publication, whether or not the plaintiff learns of the publication during that period. The Court of Appeals did not reach the core dispute between privacy rights and photographers' rights of free _expression_.
Kim MosleyChris says:
Look out for the lawyers that what I would say to John in Italy. I
think that type of image over here may be illegal as the two are being used
as models and could sue. I have had loads of problems with street
photography.* * *
The New York Supreme Court decision in Nussenzweig vs DiCorcia affirmed the right of a photograper to display, publish, and sell (at least in limited editions) street photography without the consent of the subjects of those photographs.
