This is an edited version of a document which can be downloaded from the PAGB Website library here. It is an advisory document and does not set out a policy for anyone to follow. It is intended only as guidelines for Clubs to construct their own policy.
Events in 2020 have led to the widespread introduction of on-line meetings. Meetings may be of photographic events, online lectures or judging or may be administrative. This guidance also applies where physical meetings may be recorded by video.
Before recording a meeting the organiser must consider both Copyright and Data protection and Speaker’s Copyright.
Today, in the fast expanding “Zoom-Age”, it has become very easy to record a lecture given remotely but Clubs should be aware that both a judging and a lecture are copyright performances by the speaker.
The copyright issue is not new and this piece was published in PAGB e-news, Issue 42, March 2011.
As the copyright owner, the speaker not only has the right to refuse recording of the event but also has complete control over all terms and conditions of a licence under which the Club might be permitted to use any recording. Apart from anything else, the speaker could charge a fee for a licence.
A meeting must not be recorded by a Club except with the express prior permission of the speaker, including an agreement on the use of any recording.
Photographer’s Copyright – In a competition or exhibition where the images are viewed by the judge in advance, then the judge must delete any stored images after the event. In a competition or exhibition where the images are viewed by the judge in advance, then the judge must delete any stored images after the event.
Data Protection – Clubs must already have a data protection policy (or privacy notice) which covers the personal data which they collect and the reasons for doing so. Clubs must also ensure that they comply with the practices set out in their policy.
The PAGB has published separate guidance about writing a data protection policy.
Recording a meeting either by video or by using the record feature in an on-line meeting system is likely to collect personal data not envisaged in a pre-existing data protection policy. For example, images of the participants, audio of their contributions and, for an on-line meeting, their computer account identity.
It would be possible to adapt a pre-existing data protection policy to cover the extra data collected by a recording. However, it would be open to anyone to decline to take part in a recorded meeting under those conditions. Clubs should consider whether making recordings will limit participation by all members.
Not recording an on-line meeting should mean that no personal data is retained, and that there will be no obvious data protection issues.
It is getting fashionable in some areas for clubs to photograph a lecturer’s prints so as to project them for the benefit of the audience. There are also clubs who ask to video lectures and demonstrations. It has been suggested to your editor that some clubs may have distributed and even sold CDs of such recordings to members of other clubs. I have only second party anecdotal reports and no hard evidence of such a practice, but I would be very annoyed if it happened to me and I am going to be rather more vigilant in the future. I highly recommend that every lecturer and judge should seek assurance from the club that any digital copies of their images will be deleted as soon as the event ends.