regarding facebook pics

[pokeypants]

I will confess to being a bit wary of putting too much on sites like facebook especialy when it comes to my children, there are so many sicko's about and some people just don't seem to realise the dangers. But I have tried not to become over cautious and reasoned that a few snaps of the kids on there is fine as both me and my partner are sensible and only have actual friends or family viewing our profiles.... I am however rather annoyed to find my niece has been taking my pictures of our little girl and adding them to her own profile....which i know seems harmless but she is a typical teenager and has upwards of a thousand so called friends on her list most of whom I'm guessing she doesn't actually have a clue who they are so we our little girls pics are practicaly public viewing!! Am i over reacting? I have simply asked that she not do it with our pictures, but maybe we should not put anything on there in future ourselves incase. what do other mumsnetters think to this?

honeytea

Nope, your child is not just as likely to meet a creepy individual on the high street as he is online. The internet is bigger, or hadn't you noticed?

You have a point about not transferring unwarranted concerns onto your kids.

Teaching trust is important. It doesn't mean that that trust ought to extend to massive organisations who only exist for profit. Teaching caution and sensible judgement is also very important.

And for goodness sake this is not about a random individual in Japan looking at your profile for no reason! Of course your family is not particularly interesting to most strangers. Why is that relevant? Your family's information is interesting to your insurer, it's interesting to a whole host of marketing companies, it's interesting should you ever be in a court case, it's interesting to someone who wants to sell you a house, it's interesting to social researchers, it's interesting to your DCs school (school places etc.), it's interesting to anyone who has a grudge against you now or in the future, it's interesting to the government (how you're likely to vote etc.) it's interesting to your bank etc. and so forth AND...

it's certainly interesting to the facebook corporation.

sheeplikessleep and rossetti I am not sure why you decided this thread wasn't about paedos, the OP didn't specify but she did say there are so many sicko's about and some people just don't seem to realise the dangers to me that does point to a fear of paedos.

Of course it's about paedos. Yes, thank you, I have read it. It would be rude and stupid to comment on a thread unread don't you think? So now, in addition to the paedos, the government is poring over FB is it? I think now might be a good time to get a job lot of tin hats and start a market stall! This time tomorrow I could be a millionaire.

Do you always rely on sarcasm to get your opinion across lentilly?

Rossetti, what is it that the government etc can do with the information?

Yes. There's more than one way to skin a cat. Anything else I can help you with?

honeytea

Yes the OP mentioned peados, that does not mean that saying you don't think the peado thing is a problem someone means that nothing else is a problem either.

somehow

It started about paedos, I agree.

But most of the discussion and posts (which is what I'm guessing Lentilly's 'more hysteria' post was about too) have been talking about it being a much bigger problem of anyone (whether that is FB, another big corporation, some paedophile) getting hold of data.

Unless Lentillys 'more hysteria' comment was in reference solely to the OP?

Or were you referring to the majority of the posts as 'hysteria'?

I also think the paedephile thing isn't the issue. That's part of a bigger privacy / confidentiality issue.

Nope, your child is not just as likely to meet a creepy individual on the high street as he is online. The internet is bigger, or hadn't you noticed? the internet is huge and in theory more people could veiw my child's image but in reality my image is one a billions and billions of images across the web and the chance of my image being picked out of the billions of images is very low, as is the chance of DC meeting a nasty person on the way to the shops. I'm talking here about small children who are too young to have their own profile, I do think the risk online is high for some teanagers.

As for images being of interest to insurers or if i was in a court case or to an estate agent or my bank or child's school I really don't think they are, my life however much it is of interest to my family and friends is in reality really fairly dull and I can't see what sort of useful knowledge the organisations you listed can gain about me. Marketing is the exception, so they see an album on facebook called ski trip 2011 and I get ski holiday adverts, but that isn't really a massive issue.

Rumple, family information may be interesting to an insurer, but I'm just not sure how anything on facebook could be detrimental above & beyond what you are obliged to declare anyway. I suppose if you were stupid enough to post photos of yourself going at high speeds in your car & declaring that you regularly drove above the speed limit, that could be detrimental. (I shall refrain from saying & quite rightly too, as it puts you & everyone on the road at the same time as you at risk.) Obviously if you lie about stuff too on declarations to get cheaper prices, or you claim sickness benefit & then post pics of yourself holidaying in the Algarve - that could all get you into trouble. But that in my opinion is no more than what is deserved.

I can see how it may be of interest to marketeers, so they might be able to find out about your hobbies, your travel preferences etc & try and sell you stuff - in the same way loyalty cards can be used. However, there is increasing protection in place to prevent unsolicited marketing.

Someone with a grudge against me, who is unhinged enough to do things they shouldn't - is probably going to do that regardless of facebook.

Bad things will continue to happen. If you are wise about your facebook use, I don't see it as something with limitless power to cause harm and actually used sensibly it is fun and a great way to keep in touch.

There is no right to "privacy" or "image" or anything else similar. Under UK law the presumption is that in a public place (or private grounds with permission of the owner) a photographer is free to take pictures as they please. Permission is not required to take pictures of anyone for private or commercial use and there are no exceptions for children, movie stars or politicians. (Well actually there are a couple of places where this doesn't apply but I don't think many of us will be taking family pics in a nuclear power station).

Basically, if you are out in public then you and your family are fair game for a photographer.

With regards to Facebook as longer as the person posting the image is not infringing copyright (or in violation of FBs T&Cs - e.g. nudity) then the best the OP can do is de-tag and politely request the poster takes them down - however they are under no obligation to do so.

As a photographer I take many pictures of people in many different situations, many of which end up on my website. If requested, I might take a picture down if I get a good reason and I'm asked politely but generally - tough. My picture, my decision.

"the OP didn't specify but she did say there are so many sicko's about and some people just don't seem to realise the dangers to me that does point to a fear of paedos"

I would say that "sicko's" include Trolls and internet bullies who do quite regularly comment on children's photos about how ugly they are etc

BeanieStats that sounds like a very unpleasant stance, don't you care at all if a photo of someone or their family being up is causing upset? Surely the fact tha t it being there upsets them IS a good reason in itself?

No.

Your paranoia is no reason for me to suddenly change how I operate after decades of doing so.

The laws around public photography go back decades and form a crucial part of the UK's free press. This recent half baked (as evidenced by the sheer ignore that is spouted on these kinds of threads) idiocy around "my / my childrens image" is pretty much unique to a certain kind of helicopter parent as personified by Mumsnet.

If you disagree write to MP and lobby for the law to be changed - but it won't because outside of the rarified atmosphere of Mumsnet this simply isn't an issue.

My image. My copyright. My choice.

I'm with Beanie & Catgirl.

what paranoia? FIL has proven his behaviour many times, that's not paranoia, we KNOW he would cause aggro if he got hold of information about us, but I don't want or need to disclose this to any old random in RL, I'ld hope that most people are decent enough to not want to do something that upsets others for that reason alone, you think you deserve more personal information before you deem other people's feelings valid, which is quite shitty! I've never been asked "why" when asking for DS to not be photographed or a photograph of him removed, so I will keep believing that most people are decent.

Digital photographs are very different in terms of privacy to film ones so of course people are going to feel differently about them to how we felt about them in the past!

You're asking me to destroy my work which forms the basis of my income. You're damn right I want a good reason.

"Decent" is not asking someone to deprive themselves of an income based on a paranoia.

My image. My copyright. My choice.

"Decent" is not putting a photograph of someone elses's child on your website without any permission sought or granted; and then expressing outrage when someone questions your right to do so...

The fact that your work is making someone deeply uncomfortable because it contains images of themselves or their family which they do not want publicised IS a damn good reason

and seriously how often is it going to be asked of you? do you only take 5 photos a year? how is someone occassionally expressing their distress and asking you to remove ONE image going to leave a massive dent in your income?

Bobble - you could call the police if you wished, however I am sure they would point out to you that Beanie would not be committing any crime and in fact does have the legal right to photograph your children if they are in a public place.

You may not like it but that it the law.

bobble, there is no need to call names and make very unpleasant personal comments about a poster. That is completely uncalled for.
Beanie has pointed out what the legal situation is and what is involved in her line of work.