The ‘children in bathing suits’ reference is completely lost on me, I’m afraid. If it refers to perverts ogling pictures of children, and fuelling their sick fantasies, that is not at all where I was heading. It is quite evident that this picture is not of that sort. There is no argument that it is a picture that is both beautiful and innocent. That is not at issue.

Branden has said he sees ‘no harm in this’, but (and I mean no offence here) it isn’t really up to him… or to me. It is up to the mother of the child. And she wasn’t consulted (granted this was due to a language barrier, but the fact remains.)

Let me provide a little context. I sometimes design elearning resources for an educational body. In these we include photos of children to illustrate a point or to add interest to a page. In every case, unless there has been signed release from the parents of every single child in the picture, we may not use the image (in every case, the children are fully clothed, so the question of decency does not come into it).

When you upload images to iStock, you have to declare that you have obtained a release from the ‘models’ to use the picture.

When you publish a photo on Facebook, you have to declare that you have the right to distribute the image.

It is my understanding that no such release was given here. And this is the point that makes me raise the question.

Branden makes the argument that society has become over protective. That is a personal opinion (and possibly a valid one – this is not the place to have that debate), but the data protection act in the UK would probably prohibit the use of this image without parental release. Whether you, Branden or I disagree with the provisions of this act, it doesn’t give us the right to ignore it as an inconvenience. Instead, if (as Branden seems to indicate) he considers it unnecessarily stringent, he should use the machinations at his disposal to agitate for change.

Apologies for the lengthy comment. I hope I have clarified my stance with no ill-feeling on either side.

The ‘children in bathing suits’ reference is completely lost on me, I’m afraid. If it refers to perverts ogling pictures of children, and fuelling their sick fantasies, that is not at all where I was heading. It is quite evident that this picture is not of that sort. There is no argument that it is a picture that is both beautiful and innocent. That is not at issue.

Branden has said he sees ‘no harm in this’, but (and I mean no offence here) it isn’t really up to him… or to me. It is up to the mother of the child. And she wasn’t consulted (granted this was due to a language barrier, but the fact remains.)

Let me provide a little context. I sometimes design elearning resources for an educational body. In these we include photos of children to illustrate a point or to add interest to a page. In every case, unless there has been signed release from the parents of every single child in the picture, we may not use the image (in every case, the children are fully clothed, so the question of decency does not come into it).

When you upload images to iStock, you have to declare that you have obtained a release from the ‘models’ to use the picture.

When you publish a photo on Facebook, you have to declare that you have the right to distribute the image.

It is my understanding that no such release was given here. And this is the point that makes me raise the question.

Branden makes the argument that society has become over protective. That is a personal opinion (and possibly a valid one – this is not the place to have that debate), but the data protection act in the UK would probably prohibit the use of this image without parental release. Whether you, Branden or I disagree with the provisions of this act, it doesn’t give us the right to ignore it as an inconvenience. Instead, if (as Branden seems to indicate) he considers it unnecessarily stringent, he should use the machinations at his disposal to agitate for change.

Apologies for the lengthy comment. I hope I have clarified my stance with no ill-feeling on either side.

Do you really think I am being irresponsible for posting a ‘safe’ and ‘respectable’ portrait that only shows the smiling head of a child?

Are you are going in the direction of posting pictures of children in bathing suits?