This conversation moved fast!  The host committee is purchasing colored
lanyards (red, yellow, green) which can be used as photography consent
indicators.

Maybe someone can help us nail down a good policy and approach for
communicating it?

- Tom

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Sarah Shealy <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> I see your point, nothing is 100% effective. Especially anywhere more than
> 4 or 5 people gather. I would think the first year of implementation would
> be more of a 'let everyone know' type deal. And the MC can also point out
> any changes in policy (not just this one) during breaks.
> However, with the lanyards/whatnot, the instances of unwanted photographs
> should go down. If you don't wear a badge/lanyard/etc you won't really have
> to worry about it. I'd suggest we have an addition to the policy that
> basically reads "We understand that many people will not know about this
> policy, and on a first incident someone taking an unwanted photograph is
> told about the policy. Afterwards, the case(s) will be handled as
> determined by x." There should also be a part that says "If the
> lanyard/badge/whatnot is not clearly visible, the picture taker should be
> informed of the issue and remove the image from the phone/camera." No one
> can control what happens to participants outside of the venue,
> unfortunately, but hopefully other Code4Libbers would still abide by the
> policy.
> This isn't meant to restrict your freedom or get people in trouble. It's
> to protect those who feel they need protection. I wouldn't use a
> lanyard/badge/whatnot personally (if voluntary - if you have to choose a
> color on registration, obviously I would), but I'm not going to make others
> feel as though they're in the wrong for choosing to do it.
> Did all of that make sense?
> Sarah
>
> > Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 08:52:18 -0800
> > From: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Conference photography policy
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Galen Charlton <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I would like to propose that C4L adopt a policy requiring that consent
> > > be explicitly given to be photographed or recorded, along the lines of
> > > a policy adopted by the Evergreen Project. [1]
> > >
> >
> > As a practical matter, this is functionally equivalent to prohibiting
> > photography except for arranged photos which will need something simple
> > (like pictures of  cameras and mikes with slashes through them posted
> > throughout the venue) to communicate the policy. Differential badges,
> > lanyards, etc will not always be visible, and not all people will notice
> > them, be aware of what they mean, or can be assumed to be familiar with a
> > written policy. On an aside note, a lot of activity occurs outside the
> > official venues and it is in these areas where people might be most
> > vulnerable to unwanted photos.
> >
> > kyle
>
>