Official response to using "professional" cameras and lenses at the 2012 Olympics

hollis_f said:
I think that most of people have no problem with there being restrictions on photography at the Olympics. What I, and it seems many others, find annoying is that there appears to be no clear indication as to what those restrictions may be. Now I'm not going to be stupid enough to take my 300 + 2X TC (well, I might to the Marathons) but I do want to take some pics, even if I'm not allowed to post them to Facebook. My 70-200 f4 is fairly small and would get me some good memory-joggers, but it's white and therefore, in some minds, professional. Perhaps I need to borrow a 55-250 which, being black, obviously can't take professional photos?

Perhaps I'll just do what everybody else will do and get cheap superzoom and film everything in HD video.
Click to expand...

I'd not speak like that if there's Nikon users around!
 
jamesb84 said:
Because it's not the events it's the permission to take a "pro" camera.

As for the training centres, there is so much security around them that you'd only be able to get near them if you have media accreditation...which will be as easy to come by as getting rocking horse **** if you're not already signed up and approved.
Click to expand...

I think you need to chill out a bit. How on earth can anyone stop you taking photos at the cycling road race or time trial, or for that matter a number of other events? What about the marathon on open roads or the sailing?
 
andy700 said:
I think you need to chill out a bit. How on earth can anyone stop you taking photos at the cycling road race or time trial, or for that matter a number of other events? What about the marathon on open roads or the sailing?
Click to expand...

If you enter an Olympic venue then you agree to the terms and conditions of entry.

At a cycling road race or marathon, you are not entering a venue.
 
You had to apply for media accreditation almost two years in advance!....

that so should say enough on how strict they will be at the games next year when it comes to camera's and the general public.

so... I'll be watching on the TV :)
 
jamesb84 said:
You will be searched at every venue, even to get close to the cycling or marathon
Click to expand...

Really! You really believe that they will be searching over 300,000 people per day?

As for searching everybody entering central London on the days of the marathons - pah!

Finally there's the totally ridiculous suggestion that everybody who wants to get close to the 250 km route of the cycling road race will be stopped and searched! Do you really believe that police patrols will be stationed at every B-road, farm track and footpath, ready to search people who might possibly be thinking of watching the bikes ride past?
 
hollis_f said:
Really! You really believe that they will be searching over 300,000 people per day?
Click to expand...

Clearly you know more than me, despite that the fact that I have been to three Olympics.

They will search everyone going in to every venue. Even if you manage to sneak your 70-200 in, if you are caught taking photos then you will be asked to stop and failing that, asked to leave.
 
You could always leave your Pro Kit with the security guard and pick it up from him at the end of the day :D.
 
inkiboo said:
Clearly you know more than me
Click to expand...

Sorry, I thought I was disagreeing with James, not you.

inkiboo said:
They will search everyone going in to every venue.
Click to expand...

What even, as suggested by James, the whole 250km route of the cycle road race? They are going to search everybody going into the county of Surrey?

That was obviously wrong. Less obvious was his suggestion that they would search everybody on the route of the marathons. But I still severely doubt that it would be logistically possible. Still, with all your experience you can enlighten us - did they search everybody along the route of the Athens marathons?

So, with two bits of obviously incorrect info, I felt justified in doubting the third - that everybody will be searched entering any venue. I can see how bag checks of 300,000 people might be feasible, and metal detectors might be usable (although with the sensitivity turned down). But, presumably, full searches will not be carried out on everybody. Was that the case in Athens?
 
yannick_reveur said:
i have a question related to the pictures of athletes : what if we take someone famous in photo and post if on internet? especially if for some reason the shot become famous or quite popular can we face some legal issues?
Click to expand...

From the terms and conditions:-

19.6.3 Images, video and sound recordings of the Games taken by a Ticket Holder cannot be used for any purpose other than for private and domestic purposes and a Ticket Holder may not license, broadcast or publish video and/or sound recordings, including on social networking websites and the internet more generally, and may not exploit images, video and/or sound recordings for commercial purposes under any circumstances, whether on the internet or otherwise, or make them available to third parties for commercial purposes.
Click to expand...

Your example falls at the second hurdle. The first hurdle is taking the picture. That's OK. The second hurdle is posting on an interweb. Not allowed.
 
I have a question.....

What can the organisers actually do if someone published / sold images taken at the games? My suspicion is that they really can't do much about it at all.
 
Splog said:
I have a question.....

What can the organisers actually do if someone published / sold images taken at the games? My suspicion is that they really can't do much about it at all.
Click to expand...

I'd guess they could sue you for the earnings from the shot? Would that fall under IP infringement?

Getty is big and organised, if they own the photo rights to the events I'd be more scared of them than I would be if it was just the government saying 'please don't take photos'.
 
incapete said:
I'd guess they could sue you for the earnings from the shot? Would that fall under IP infringement?

Getty is big and organised, if they own the photo rights to the events I'd be more scared of them than I would be if it was just the government saying 'please don't take photos'.
Click to expand...

Thanks Peter

I seriously doubt that they would be able to successfully sue for earnings? unless they had an almost identical shot :thinking:
 
Splog said:
Thanks Peter

I seriously doubt that they would be able to successfully sue for earnings? unless they had an almost identical shot :thinking:
Click to expand...

I meant your earning from your shot, rather than lost earnings from one of their own. I'm no expert by any means so my post was just a guess.
 
incapete said:
I meant your earning from your shot, rather than lost earnings from one of their own. I'm no expert by any means so my post was just a guess.
Click to expand...

Yes, I did understand your meaning :thumbs: My point however, was that whatever conditions they chose to apply? Then for them to actually take any action against a photographer who sold the pics .. they would have to prove a financial loss and I doubt they would be able to do this?...... Then again I could be wrong :shrug:
 
incapete said:
Getty is big and organised, if they own the photo rights to the events I'd be more scared of them than I would be if it was just the government saying 'please don't take photos'.
Click to expand...

To repeat, Getty Images DO NOT, HAVE NOT and WILL NOT own the photo rights to the 2012 Olympics.

As for any action the IOC/LOCOG would take, you enter a venue and agree to their terms and conditions.
 
hollis_f said:
What even, as suggested by James, the whole 250km route of the cycle road race? They are going to search everybody going into the county of Surrey?

That was obviously wrong. Less obvious was his suggestion that they would search everybody on the route of the marathons. But I still severely doubt that it would be logistically possible. Still, with all your experience you can enlighten us - did they search everybody along the route of the Athens marathons?

So, with two bits of obviously incorrect info, I felt justified in doubting the third - that everybody will be searched entering any venue. I can see how bag checks of 300,000 people might be feasible, and metal detectors might be usable (although with the sensitivity turned down). But, presumably, full searches will not be carried out on everybody. Was that the case in Athens?
Click to expand...

They will not search everyone on the 250km road circuit

They will not search everyone on the marathon but far more than on the 250km circuit.

They will 100% search everyone who is entering an Olympic venue. If you have a bag, it will go through an x-ray machine and you physically will go through a magnometer.
 
inkiboo said:
They will 100% search everyone who is entering an Olympic venue. If you have a bag, it will go through an x-ray machine and you physically will go through a magnometer.
Click to expand...

That sounds realistic. So, somebody wanting to get some long shots should probably stick a body with a nifty-fifty attached in their bag and a 55-250 in their pocket. At last an advantage of plastic lenses.

Me, I'll buy a superzoom pocket camera and use that.
 
Splog said:
Then for them to actually take any action against a photographer who sold the pics .. they would have to prove a financial loss and I doubt they would be able to do this?......
Click to expand...
The argument I would make is that it undermines their restricted market if photos are available elsewhere. Why would a newspaper pay £x for an official LOCOG-approved photo when they can get one for far less off the Internet?
I imagine the pro togs who've paid an arm and a leg for a license have done so on the agreement that the organisers will restrict amateurs distributing photos and saturating the market. This is why they are banning putting photos up on the web even if you're not selling them - a lot of people upload full-size images which the Daily Mail can steal.

In short, the photo doesn't have to be identical to reduce the value of their own images - and thus they have a good argument for claiming damages.
 
Llamaman said:
This is why they are banning putting photos up on the web even if you're not selling them - a lot of people upload full-size images which the Daily Mail can steal.
Click to expand...

Are they banning the posting of photos on the web?

Here are the T&Cs

19.6.3 Images, video and sound recordings of the Games taken by a Ticket Holder cannot be used for any purpose other than for private and domestic purposes and a Ticket Holder may not license, broadcast or publish video and/or sound recordings, including on social networking websites and the internet more generally, and may not exploit images, video and/or sound recordings for commercial purposes under any circumstances, whether on the internet or otherwise, or make them available to third parties for commercial purposes.
Click to expand...

Now, it does say that one can't use photos for anything but personal and domestic uses. But I would say that posting photos to my Facebook page is personal use - the number of people that could view the image is restricted to roughly the same number as could view it if it were hanging on my wall (which I'm sure would count as domestic use).

The prohibition against posting on social networking sites refers specifically to video and/or sound recordings. The ommission of the word 'images' - which is specifically included in the other two restrictions - would mean that this section does not include still images.

In summary, this paragraph says that you can post still images on your Facebook page, or Flickr, or your own web site as long as you're not offering them for sale.

When you buy your tickets you agree to the T&Cs as a legal contract. If you try flogging still images, or post videos to Youtube, they can sue you in the civil courts for breach of contract.
 
Apologies, I hadn't read the T&Cs carefully enough.

It appears you can upload photos as long as you don't sell them but cannot upload video at all.

To sue for breach of contract, they still have to prove that they have suffered a financial loss in order for damages to be awarded. However, I think they should be able to make that argument on the basis discussed in my previous post.
 
inkiboo said:
To repeat, Getty Images DO NOT, HAVE NOT and WILL NOT own the photo rights to the 2012 Olympics.
Click to expand...

I had only got that impression from stuff discussed on this thread, I must have got the wrong idea, sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top