ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets

2012-04-24 16:28:07
Martin,

I invite you to post a copy of your law degree, license, and
credentials for the edification of this group.  In the interim
and in the event that you are correct, I strongly encourage the
IASA to avoid ever holding an IETF meeting in Germany again
without first obtaining appropriate legal advice that it is
acceptable given our existing conditions to record the names and
identities of anyone participating in any IETF activity, whether
they are explicitly sign something, are photographed, are
identified by RFID, have their names written down after they
stay something at a microphone or on Jabber, raise their hands
(presumably in the expectation of being identified), or can be
identified in some other way.  Of course, an acceptable
alternative to "no meetings in Germany or any other country with
the rules you suggest apply" would be explicit permission on
registration forms as a condition of attendance.  Or,
presumably, a Chair could make an announcement that anyone who
continues to sit in a particular room is giving permission for
such identification.

As Christian suggests, we simply have to be able to identify
participants in WG sessions, even silent ones, to have an open
standards process.

Again, I will strongly defend your right to privacy, absence of
identifying photography, etc.  Just do not simultaneously claim
that right and the right to participate in the IETF.

    john


--On Tuesday, 24 April, 2012 21:34 +0200 Martin Rex
<mrex(_at_)sap(_dot_)com> wrote:

Michael StJohns wrote:

While Wikipedia is sometimes wrong, it does tend to have
useful information.= Specifically
 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_c
 on= sent_requirements#Germany

Publishing or propagating the image does not normally
require consent: If the person is an irrelevant or merely
accidental part (Beiwerk) of a landscape or locality shown
in the picture.
If the person took part in a public meeting or event and is
depicted on this occasion.
If distribution or exhibition serves a higher artistic
interest.

http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/kunsturhg/__23.html

That information in an incorrect translation, and it is
quoting only part (1) of the article and missing part (2).


§22 (1) 2.+ 3. KunstUrhG  are quite related in the intent


the translation of (2) captures the original meaning correctly:

  2. Bilder, auf denen die Personen nur als Beiwerk neben einer
     Landschaft oder sonstigen Örtlichkeit erscheinen;

If the person is an irrelevant or merely accidental part
(Beiwerk) of a landscape or locality shown in the picture.


The translation of (3) is not quite correct:

  3. Bilder von Versammlungen, Aufzügen und ähnlichen
Vorgängen,      an denen die dargestellten Personen
teilgenommen haben;

If the person took part in a public meeting or event and is
depicted on this occasion.

This is about pictures of an (public) assembly, parade or
similar event which the pictured peoples participated, and NOT
the other way round!

The translation you quoted is flawed logic.

from the rules:
    1.  all men are mortals
    2.  socrates was a man
you can infer  "socrates was mortal",

But infering the reverse "all mortals are men", "all men are
socrates" or "all mortals are socrates" amounts to flawed
logic.


When making a photo of the audience(!) with a small number of
people prominently in the foreground, then the exclusion no
longer applies and you will need consent of the folks in order
to _publish_ such a photo, similar for taking pictures of the
_spectators_ of a parade.

For people doing presentations in front, or speaking at the
podium of a public assembly or convention, the exception may
apply to a singular depicted person if it is still a "picture
of the event" (i.e. a picture in context).

Just because someone participates an assembly, convention or is
the spectator of a parade does NOT result in a general loss of
control over pictures&portraits of that person.


-Martin