The Accidental Hedonist's Guide to:







My Book





99 Drams of Whiskey:The Accidental Hedonist's Quest for the Perfect Shot and the History of the Drink




Communication


DC Foodies vs. Carole Greenwood

01/02/06, by Kate Hopkins Email 5797 views • Categories: Food Blogs

Now this here is a bit o' interestingness...

It seems as if Jason at DC Foodies has had a run in with Buck's Camping and Fishing chef and owner Carole Greenwood. While eating dinner, he took some pictures of the food (as food bloggers are wont to do), which caused the chef to come out during dessert and discuss the legalities of picture taking. Aside from that, it appears as if Jason enjoyed the meal.

That is, until Carole Greenwood's Lawyer sent a cease and desist letter. From the letter:

Dear Sir:

Please be advised that my client, Buck's Camping and Fishing, has requested that I contact you with a demand that you cease and desist from showing any pictures that you may have taken of the food and facilities of the said restaurant.

Carole Greenwood can be a pain in the tuckus to her customers, or at least so says Washington Post writer Tom Sietsema, so this outburst should not be that big of a surprise.

But it does beg the question, should a restaurant patron be able to take pictures of the food in a restaurant? Or is the mere look of the food proprietary, as Chef Greenwood would claim?
Of course, the folks at eGullet are all over it, with the best answer so far coming from writer cdh:

Copyright law is pretty clear that the pictures you take are yours and only yours. If the chef has any copyrightable subject matter that you took a picture of, then you might need rights, but I really doubt that the composition of a dish on a plate is copyrightable subject matter... (probably too utilitarian, though it might be artistic enough, and consequently a potentially very expensive issue to litigate... if she can afford the fight herself...)

So, you, as an invitee on the restaurant's property are licensed to be there subject to their conditions, one of which might be that you don't use a camera. If your license to be on the property expires because you use your camera, you might be liable to the owner of the property for trespassing on their land (damages are usually minimal)... but the pictures are still yours. You definitely own the copyright to the pictures, and unless you agreed to a nondisclosure agreement you can probably do with them as you please.

Personally, I have no issue with taking pictures at a restaurant, as long as I don't ruin other people's eating experience (I no longer use flashes on my camera at a restaurant). But I'm also biased, because word on the street is that I'm a food blogger.

Can anyone provide better information on this?

Technorati Tags: , , ,


Comments, Pingbacks:

Comment from: Penny [Visitor] · http://www.BostonZest.Com
Take a look at this article on photographer's rights. He has a downloadable copy you can use.

http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm

It does say that property owners can prohibit photography on thier premises.

Perhaps we should take our plates outside to photograph them. (VBG)

Penny
PermalinkPermalink 01/02/06 @ 18:48
Comment from: jen [Visitor] · http://www.lifebeginsat30.com
Interesting post Kate - do you have time to put a pointer to it on Food Blog Scool? If no, I will do it tomorrow @ some point.
PermalinkPermalink 01/02/06 @ 19:26
Comment from: Barbara Fisher [Visitor] · http://www.tigersandstrawberries.com/
Lots of people who do not blog take pictures in restaurants, especially if it is a holiday or birithday or anniversary or whatever.

The chef needs to stay in the kitchen and cook and keep out of the dining room and away from customers. If I was her partner, I'd want to smack her in the back of her rude head.

It is all ego and paranoia.

I bet that Sietsema will cover this in some way.
PermalinkPermalink 01/02/06 @ 20:34
Comment from: Tana [Visitor] · http://smallfarms.typepad.com
I'm solidly in the "shame on the chef" camp.
PermalinkPermalink 01/02/06 @ 21:46
Comment from: Raspberry Sour [Visitor] · http://sourpatch.wordpress.com
Sounds like a whole lot of bad publicity over nothing. At any rate, even if photography is prohibited on the premises, the ownership of the photos should be a different matter.

If it was really such a problem, you'd think the chef would simply request that he not take photographs in the future (and perhaps instruct the waitstaff to be a little more vigilant in their monitoring of the customers). But you can't argue with ego.
PermalinkPermalink 01/02/06 @ 21:53
Comment from: Ivonne [Visitor]
This past June I went to Chez Panisse and took pictures of every course they brought. I didn't get any complaints.

This just looks bad on the individual and on the restaurant!
PermalinkPermalink 01/03/06 @ 05:20
Comment from: linechef007 [Visitor]
Well said, Juliette: your follow-up article on Super Chef blog was even better. I'm going to post this on Jason's DC Foodies site right now. If bloggers like him want an audience, then they have to act responsibly. And you seem to have the simplest, most straightforward approach.

(Hey, just read the bio on your personal webiste that says you're a professional journalist and started the Celebrity Chefs column in Forbes magazine, in which case let me thank you further for injecting some profesionalism into the blogosphere.)
PermalinkPermalink 01/03/06 @ 11:10
Comment from: Barbara Fisher [Visitor] · http://www.tigersandstrawberries.com/
Yes, Juliette's method is professionalism personified, however, the way in which chef Carole Greenwood handled her complaint was not particularly professional.

Juliette's advice does not cover what to do when a chef comes out of the kitchen to berate a customer in public.
PermalinkPermalink 01/03/06 @ 11:49
Comment from: Chef Tony [Visitor] · http://www.diningandwining.typepad.com
Unfortunattely only in america...
PermalinkPermalink 01/03/06 @ 14:07
Comment from: stephen [Visitor] · http://www.stephencooks.com/
I don't take pix in restaurants because I don't cover restaurants in my blog, and if I want to remember the dish or plating I just make a few notes.

However, I'm wondering why, instead of getting all legalistic about "who owns the picture," it wouldn't work to just explain that you would like to take pix for a blog post about the restaurant, ask for permission, and abide by the answer? (It might help to have a business card for the blog.)

Isn't this what print journalists/photographers do? I don't think there's any reason bloggers should act like furtive guerilla media types, or be at all sneaky or confrontational about what we are doing -- and if we do, why be surprised if the restaurant owner feels defensive?

Soon enough we will have all the power that print media has today, so maybe we we should just start now to act responsibly as legitimate members of the media.

Maybe I'm missing something, since I'm not trying to cover restaurants...
PermalinkPermalink 01/03/06 @ 17:18
Comment from: Tana [Visitor] · http://smallfarms.typepad.com
DCFoodie's wife wrote about this on her blog, and it's pretty darned funny.

There is also a very good (and informed) discussion at the DonRockwell.com forum for DC folks (and, well, other people like me who are simply fans of Rocks and his clan).
PermalinkPermalink 01/04/06 @ 07:58
Comment from: ExtraMSG [Visitor] · http://www.extramsg.com
I take a lot of photos at restaurants. I have had a few places that weren't truly restaurants ask me to stop. A bakery, a couple markets, etc. Usually markets are the most sensitive. eg, Whole Foods gets really pissy. I've had several managers at ethnic markets tell me to stop.

In my experience, the best rule of thumb is that it's better to ask for forgiveness than permission because given the opportunity to say no, people will just because they don't know you and are naturally suspicious.

The only experience at a full on restaurant I've had where I was told to put the camera away was Aguila y Sol in Mexico City. One of the creepiest dining experiences ever and I'm still really pissed about it 7 months later.

It's a very chic restaurant where all the servers and the owner/hostess all speak impeccable English. I had already taken pictures of all my courses at Izote, Patricia Quintana's restaurant, to the owner's delight. I wasn't using a flash or anything and they quickly swooped down on me as soon as they saw the camera. I should have tried to be more sneaky. Not only that, I was trying to take notes and the owner came up to me and insisted that I put those away as well. They wouldn't let me have a menu and promised to send me one, but never did. I seriously hate that place. Only meal of my trip that I have almost no notes, etc. Food was better at Izote anyway.
PermalinkPermalink 01/04/06 @ 11:10
Comment from: lakat18 [Visitor]
To me, it's exactly like sports. (And I love food about a billion times more than sports.) You may be talented, but if you can't be civil you shouldn't be celebrated. There is a difference between being an "artiste" with a bit of attitude and being a colossal jerk. It wouldn't be worth it to me to line a nefarious chef's pockets regardless of the alleged quality of the food.
PermalinkPermalink 01/09/06 @ 15:36
Comment from: dash [Visitor]
i don't know the chef, but it sounds like the rest of you could stand a trip back to charm school. when you're in a restaurant, you're in that chef's house as it were--yeah, take the fig leaf of it being a public place if you must, all the worse for your sense of manners. Real news people know you can take pix from the curb of anyplace but really need to get permission once you're on private property. That's just standard practice. And the law--you really gotta go there?--is no substitute for decency.
PermalinkPermalink 02/09/06 @ 15:02
Comment from: Jadxia [Visitor] · http://www.iricchi.net
As both a manager in a restaurant and a photographer, I'd like to offer a little clarity.

LEGALLY: You may take pictures of food, but not of people, and those pictures are yours to keep. In most instances, they cannot confiscate your equipment or the pictures, the one exception being if signs are posted on the property prohibiting photo taking or equipment. However, legally, they are also allowed to refuse to service if they want and throw you off same property. They don't have to be nice about it when they boot you out, either.

COURTESY: It's rude to sneak in and take pictures, especially if you are using a flash because then you are disturbing other diners. Rather, talk with the general manager, or better yet, the owner, and either ask for pictures or ask to take pictures beforehand. Most times, they are happy to provide food pictures just for the publicity, and they can't stop you from writing whatever you want about the restaurant.

So in this instance, what is LEGAL and what is POLITE may differ slightly. Politeness, in my opinion, usually is always the best bet.
PermalinkPermalink 08/16/06 @ 13:23

Leave a comment:

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.
Your URL will be displayed.

Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small>
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email and url)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will NOT be displayed.))
What color is a red balloon?