Best Practice - children
  • 2007/5/4 8:31

  • Anonymous

  • Posts: 0

  • Since:


I've been having a discussion about images featuring youngsters on my site.

The site's main user/viewer-base is adult but our organisation does have a fair few junior members and in news items, etc there are pictures of them receiving awards, etc.

Whilst the images all have filenames that do not identify the people on the pictures (I'm using the XOOPS image manger which renames files), people are named in the text. Often, the juniors are pictured with their parents or a responsible adult, but sometimes not.

It has been suggested that I souldn't be using the junior members names in full (e.g. "Photo of John Smith with his certificate"), etc. Nowhere on the site are their email addresses of junior members and, where the junior members are registered with the site, their email addresses are hidden.

Should I be using only the junior members' first names? Can anyone point me to a "Best Practice Guide" or somesuch which will help me decide what to do?

Very many thanks

Re: Best Practice - children
  • 2007/5/4 9:34

  • Herko

  • XOOPS is my life!

  • Posts: 4238

  • Since: 2002/2/4 1

This is a privacy issue. The only way you can get a sure answer is by seeking a lawyer.

However, here's my personal view (IANAL - I am not a lawyer and TINLA - this is not legal advice): full names are part of the public domain. It should be, as it's main purpose is for it to be a unique identifier in the daily interaction with your surroundings. This is also why providing a false name to authorities is illegal in most cases.
Protecting one's privacy is part of any website's responsibility. But this should go as far as possible, and use publicly available information such as a full name in combination with a photo, only if it fits the purpose of the website. If so, joining that website means you agree to provide your public information on the website for that purpose.

You will have to decide if it fits the purpose of your website, and inform your members of this consequence (and perhaps debate how far the consequences should reach). If they don't agree, they're free to leave. Or, alternatively, you can change the policy.


Re: Best Practice - children
  • 2007/5/4 9:54

  • Anonymous

  • Posts: 0

  • Since:

Herko Coomans wrote:

This is a privacy issue.

That sums up my view.

I took the photos specifically for the website and the juniors themselves were keen on this. I guess that I should seek the explicit permission of their parents, though. There's only a couple of photos so this is easily done.

I'd be more worried if it were possible for a third-party to contact the kids via the website but this isn't possible as things stand.

Thanks for the heads-up, Herko - much appreciated.

However, I'm more than willing to listen to other points of view - anyone care to venture an opinion?

Re: Best Practice - children
  • 2007/5/4 11:50

  • skenow

  • Home away from home

  • Posts: 993

  • Since: 2004/11/17

In the US, there is a law - COPPA (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act) - that specifically addresses this issue.

It only covers commercial web sites, but you at least should develop a privacy policy for your web site and state what your practices are and what options parents and children have. Here is what we have published for our church's site - Easter's Privacy Policy

Re: Best Practice - children
  • 2007/5/4 16:56

  • gestroud

  • Home away from home

  • Posts: 1538

  • Since: 2004/12/22

Considering all of the pedophiles and child predators around these days, you may consider displaying the names the same way you sign your posts: "John V."

Re: Best Practice - children
  • 2007/5/21 2:30

  • JMorris

  • XOOPS is my life!

  • Posts: 2722

  • Since: 2004/4/11

This is only my personal opinion, and not the advice of someone versed in law, so please take it as such...

There are some really sick people out there and unless you can get written approval from the guardians of the children you post on your site, I wouldn't do it.

In fact, just because of the perverts out there, I wouldn't post pics of any kids.

I'm a bit hard corps about this kind of thing as I'm a loving parent, but I think it is important to protect our children from sick freaks.

Again, this is only my opinion as a parent.
Insanity can be defined as "doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

Stupidity is not a crime. Therefore, you are free to go.

Re: Best Practice - children
  • 2007/7/23 20:06

  • aroundme

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 9

  • Since: 2007/7/19

yes, i agree.

Re: Best Practice - children
  • 2007/7/23 20:31

  • seth_sd

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 158

  • Since: 2004/11/9

Newspaper do it all the time. I would do what's reasonable but also think logically...What would someone really gain by knowing that a kids name is "John Smith" and here is what he looks like? We're not giving out his home address, social security number or keys to house.

It's really no different than if we saw him playing in front of his house or at school? We have to seperate personal information from a pic on the web and I wouldn't think that a picture taken in the public domain gives anybody an expectation of privacy...juvenile or adult.

My point of view is based living in the U.S.
"Why can't we have a car powered on a mixture of patchouli oil, ignorance, and double standards? There seems to be an inexhaustible supply of that sh1t." - LR


Who's Online

154 user(s) are online (53 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)

Members: 0

Guests: 154



Goal: $100.00
Due Date: Dec 31
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $100.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits