Moin, some camera man is really harsh, researching and ran roughly s.die person that he wants to capture the tape. Afterwards pixelated - and it may have none anymore. Think about it. And perhaps this is as synonymous. There are certainly no personal rights violated when such recordings, in which really no longer synonymous nearly anyone can see, will be presented publicly, whether on TV, in movies or elsewhere. We know all those movies, even of "serious" makers and broadcasters. A reference such as "covertly filmed", the Clandestine activities such stress - yes, finally, the drama synonymous vote, attention must be achieved. I left the very ABC of filmmaking (for my sake: Video-making) is not understood, if I believe that all these recordings (so they are not gefaked), already voted against the right of their picture, because all of these shots yes originally "unencrypted" were as follows: Any person who is the audacious cinematographer (make synonymous women?-Nope, right?) to incandescence has brought in the original material klipp & clear. There are to my knowledge no camera with built-in smart pixel technology ... So, what it says: Can I get my Project, an hour in a secondary category incorporated all the faces and posthumously to pixels that pass through, with no criminal complaints and civil actions to be overwhelmed? (The still existing legal abuse law-relic of the Third Reich-know myself in this hints are superfluous. It is just to exchange views.)
Antwort von Login_vergessen:
Such questions are a flat rate can not be answered. In your case I would the classroom as a specially protected area considered, in which people not so easy without their consent may be filmed. In addition, the school synonymous nor the right house, synonymous here would be an approval of distress. Whether an action is always synonymous to a conviction has resulted in synonymous is another matter. Remember when your project is not that a TV channel has a legal, you as a "private person" may have given himself the filth on the "chopping" ...
Antwort von jansi:
Hi Unfortunately, there have no idea Why I'm here but reply is s.meiner idea. 1) Can you give the camera to the back in the classroom ask? If only all of the back are visible, but is ok. 2) Also you could ask all the people involved, whether they are filmed dürfen.Wenn all give their consent, it is ok. 3) The fact that all the videos with defaced face again in the original, without blurring of the face exist true I think. But as long as you only show the video (whom, actually?), Where the faces are not seen, it would be synonymous not actually banned, right?
However, you can not synonymous to the original without further use!
Since when do we actually make the face blurred, for example in the press will be shown? Have recently in the newspaper s Still Image of a terrorist seen face verpixelt. Exactly the same (!) Still image was in the other newspaper with clear face shown ...
Antwort von Pianist:
404ERR
Antwort von Login_vergessen:
"Pianist" wrote:
Well - a classroom should be no more "highly personal area of life" to be. So accesses to § 201a StGB not.
Is it via text not synonymous. Nevertheless, I would in this case will see if I have something as a private man wanted to shoot. I refer again to the non-existing legal ...
If I purely 201a of the letter follows: The owner of the house allows me to right the shooting, the people know nothing of them: Faces before the publication of pixels or seek permission. Shooting in the house are not allowed: From the outside through the window film, faces possibly pixels unless there is a screening before the windows. Then again nothing, because "drüber film" is not synonymous again ...
So my interpretation of 201a.
Antwort von Pianist:
"Login_vergessen" wrote:
The owner of the house allows me to right the shooting, the people know of it but nothing
This variant, you can forget it. No school will allow something, if people remain unaware. This action can in any case cause a heap of trouble, so just something I would really only do if weighty reasons.
Matthias
Antwort von jansi:
Regarding the sound: It generally prohibits any house rules, sound signal ...
Antwort von Login_vergessen:
The school under the given circumstances, a refusal Dreherlaunbnis is obviously clear. It was so synonymous only to explore the possibilities with regard to the § 201a.
Antwort von Feit:
First, thanks for the contributions so far. One solution I have unfortunately not yet. -We can simplify the matter: Sound is not necessary, since the viewer s.Bewegungen and sign clearly recognize what is in the class is going on. The thing has a real Background: A secondary teacher asked me to strongly favor any of his hours in one of his classes to film. The man is in my view, just before the nervous breakdown, he is also, as he said, because of elevated blood pressure schlaganfallgefärdet. In most classes, this school has a unimaginable chaos, what I now of virtually everyone working there any teachers in confirming it. In practice the Filmerei look like this: I myself am not at all present, but install only the famous "hidden camera", the synonymous only a certain group of students to cover. The teacher wants with the uncut, but pixelated material parents and school and, if necessary, other parties on the "normal" conditions s.seiner school. This looks to me after a very desperate for help from. And again: No school, no student of third parties will be recognized, but the material is convincingly to be explosive, as well s.jeden virtually day in the shop of the "Problem Bear" is going on. The aim of the action is the formation of smaller classes, a teacher hopes to be assisted by a second teacher (in Lower Saxony, which is probably actually be possible). Rotary permission, house legal, ... -are not the problem. For me, the most important question: How do you evaluate that before any defacing of persons by whatever method-always synonymous in any case a non-manipulated "original", the raw material, therefore, must have existed. Should I explain s.Eides Instead, this material is never used to be - or better yet, to have it destroyed? The same problem but have almost all TV channels, which show regular people who, if they still synonymous pixelated are so beautiful, never before and never consented to photocopy gave no preference, whether verbally, through gestures, facial expressions or any other kind of utterance.
Antwort von Pianist:
When exactly is, as you've written it here, then I would say: Do it. And because of the first unverpixelten shots you should not worry because 201a is not relevant. If you are the teacher can help improve the situation and to reach him before the stroke or heart attack to keep, then you should do.
Matthias
Antwort von jansi:
Yes. I agree to a pianist. Do it! (But install the cam so that it can not be destroyed, some of you never know ....)
