I also think that there is rampant violation of children's privacy from attention seeking idiots out there. The mommy, granny or auntie bloggers who share way too many details about their kids lives for everyone to see just so they can get attention are really disgusting IMO. It is humiliating for the children but all the person cares about is getting attention.

Kids deserve to not have their images or their lives broadcast so granny, auntie or mommy can get a few more clicks or likes.

There is a difference between sharing. If I share a digital image with granny and she posts it on a website or social media and refuses to take it down. I can contact the platform and they will take it down. If granny texts or emails it to her book club, I can do anything to pull it back but I can stop sending images to granny. If granny insists on taking her own pictures and posting them anyway I can easily disallow granny access to the kids.

I've honestly never heard of someone refusing to take down or cease and deists from posting a kid's picture when a parent asks. Someone who is this rude is likely to be a boundary crossing a-hole in other ways so chances are they end up being no contacted anyway.

Anonymous wrote:

Posting on social media is not equivalent to texting pictures to close friends and OP is banning that as well.

I don't see a problem with this. Texting photos is actually worse because the EXIF data including time, date and location is embedded when you text a photo to someone. There is no reason why anyone's friends need a picture of someone else's grandchildren.

No one has a right to publish or share images of your children. Schools, camps and organizations are required to offer opt out options.

Grandparents who do not respect these boundaries, don't get to visit the grandchildren.

I'd like to see the law on this? Grandparents have been sending class photos of their grandkids to extended family via mail without asking Mommy for decades. Was any grandma jailed for this that I don't know about?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No, this is not the law, sweetie. You don't have that level of control. If they aren't getting any financial gain, the photo rights are the shooters.

Nope you can request that the platform take it down. Practically speaking though only an intense asshole would refuse to take down a picture of someone else's kid from social media.

you think facebook is going to take someone's photo down? highly unlikely.

+1. You can request. Likely won't go anywhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Posting on social media is not equivalent to texting pictures to close friends and OP is banning that as well.

I don't see a problem with this. Texting photos is actually worse because the EXIF data including time, date and location is embedded when you text a photo to someone. There is no reason why anyone's friends need a picture of someone else's grandchildren.

No one has a right to publish or share images of your children. Schools, camps and organizations are required to offer opt out options.

Grandparents who do not respect these boundaries, don't get to visit the grandchildren.

Others have explained that this isn't always the case.

And regarding the bold, so what? What exactly is the harm you are protecting your child from, when you ban Grandma from texting the picture to Aunt Suzie? It's insanity.

Anonymous wrote:

No, this is not the law, sweetie. You don't have that level of control. If they aren't getting any financial gain, the photo rights are the shooters.

Nope you can request that the platform take it down. Practically speaking though only an intense asshole would refuse to take down a picture of someone else's kid from social media.

you think facebook is going to take someone's photo down? highly unlikely.

No, this is not the law, sweetie. You don't have that level of control. If they aren't getting any financial gain, the photo rights are the shooters.

Nope you can request that the platform take it down. Practically speaking though only an intense asshole would refuse to take down a picture of someone else's kid from social media.

https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/personal-injury/types-of-personal-injury-claims/child-photography-or-videotaping-consent-laws-are-changing.html


Child Photography or Videotaping Consent Laws
Basically, with a few exceptions, it is actually perfectly legal for strangers to photograph or videotape your child, and they are free to post or publish the images as well.

I don’t know what kind of world you live in but I don’t implement rules on other grown adults. That is insane.

Anonymous wrote:

Not exactly. If your children are out in public, anyone can take a photo and post it.

Actually no, you have a right to request that they take it down if you know about it. If they don't comply you can contact the platform that it was posted on to have it removed.

Ha ha ha!

No, this is not the law, sweetie. You don't have that level of control. If they aren't getting any financial gain, the photo rights are the shooters.

Not exactly. If your children are out in public, anyone can take a photo and post it.

Actually no, you have a right to request that they take it down if you know about it. If they don't comply you can contact the platform that it was posted on to have it removed.

I don't think that people realize the level of data that gets embedded within digital photos or the sophistication of AI now to identify people even in social media sites that strip the data upon upload.

Here's an example. Grandma takes a picture at her grandchild's school recital and posts it on facebook and texts it to a few friends The image on facebook doesn't have any meta data but in the image the school name is displayed or a kid is wearing a band shirt with the school name. The recital or concert is listed on the school website. Now school, date and location is known. Grandma's name and other relatives are known from other posts in facebook.

Lets say the parents opted out of having their kids photos published by the school or sports team. OK fine but the facial recognition AI can pick up the faces of the other kids who did not opt out. The AI can make.a pretty good prediction about which sports team correlate with the other kids in the band. If grandma has posted about her grandchild having a game or winning a game then now the sports team the kid plays on is known. Real estate transactions are public record. Its pretty easy from other public records let alone facebook posts to identify immediate relatives. Now the kids address is known. Its likely that at some point grandma has used her child's name before and the child's name would show up in public records.

So now the kid's image, name, address, school, sports team and game schedule, what instrument he/she plays, parent's name, and classmates is all known all from the social media posts.

Lets go back to the texting pictures to friends. If any of her friends upload or post this to a photo sharing site rather than social media the EXIF data stays embedded. EXIF data can include more image data surrounding the image, date. location and a whole host of image. Its easy to retrieve from a photo that has not been stripped. I guarantee you that granny and granny's friends do not know how to strip EXIF data.

Anonymous wrote:

Posting on social media is not equivalent to texting pictures to close friends and OP is banning that as well.

I don't see a problem with this. Texting photos is actually worse because the EXIF data including time, date and location is embedded when you text a photo to someone. There is no reason why anyone's friends need a picture of someone else's grandchildren.

No one has a right to publish or share images of your children. Schools, camps and organizations are required to offer opt out options.

Grandparents who do not respect these boundaries, don't get to visit the grandchildren.

Not exactly. If your children are out in public, anyone can take a photo and post it.

Posting on social media is not equivalent to texting pictures to close friends and OP is banning that as well.

I don't see a problem with this. Texting photos is actually worse because the EXIF data including time, date and location is embedded when you text a photo to someone. There is no reason why anyone's friends need a picture of someone else's grandchildren.

No one has a right to publish or share images of your children. Schools, camps and organizations are required to offer opt out options.

Grandparents who do not respect these boundaries, don't get to visit the grandchildren.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haha. Think of, for example, a coworker you are close with. She says "My first grand baby was born yesterday! I'm so proud! No, I can't show you a picture. Why not? I uhhh, well, I'm forbidden from showing people photos of my grandbaby. My DIL is afraid of....I don't know what... well she's a crazy person. "

I don’t think most parents are concerned about grandparents showing someone a photo in person. The concern is usually putting the photo on the internet. My mom is welcome to show my kids’ photos to the checkout person at the grocery store for all I care, but I have asked her not to put photos on social media and she respects that (and when my loopy aunts put pics of my kids on Facebook, my mom is the one who asks them to take it down).

But, but, the checkout person could be a pedophile and get all your personal information from you MIL (or even mother) ! Your rule should be no photos ever!

Stop pretending you don't understand that showing a photo to someone in person is completely different that putting it out there on social media to live on the interwebs forever.

And yes there are pedophiles scraping social media for rubes who have no privacy settings, to gather photos they can include in their special databases, I have professional experience dealing with these folks.

They are much less common than your old high school friends who want to jack it to the photos the moms are posting of their barely dressed teenagers.

Posting on social media is not equivalent to texting pictures to close friends and OP is banning that as well.