"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Bluesea writes:

We're talking about the same Afghan girl,
http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/afghangirl, right?

Yes. The one who looks 100 years older than she really is today.

100? I'll go 10. To me, she looks like she's in her late 30's or early to
mid-40's.

In which case, "No." According to NG, it was taken in
the Nasir Bagh refugee camp in Pakistan.

My mistake. So, did they get a signed release when they took the photo?

I don't know.

Pro'lly because she was a refugee and not precisely situated to find out
and
press her case?

So there is no need to respect the rights of someone without lawyers?

I was speculating on the situation, not on the need to respect others's
privacy w/ or w/o attorneys. War situations, in particular, make people
forgetful of otherwise ordinary things and I don't know under what pressures
McCully was working at the time.

Then again, do the requirements about releases apply to
people there as much as they do to people in the U.S.
or Europe?

In the U.S., you obey U.S. laws. The publication occurred in the U.S.,
not in Pakistan or Afghanistan.

You have me at a disadvantage since I know very little about publishing
photos of people in other countries, much less refugee camps. I would have
thought that it depended on the laws of the subject's residence since it's
the subject's privacy that's at stake. She had no idea that her face is
famous. How was her privacy violated when no one knew who she was or where
she was?

When the question of renumeration was raised, NG said she's
being taken care of now.

Twenty years later? I don't think that would go over very well in most
courtrooms. Besides, if she is being paid now, that's a tacit admission
that a release was required all along.

The website didn't say she's being paid, just that she's being taken care
of. They did provide medical treatment for the ill members of her family as
soon as they could. She didn't want anything for herself, just her family.

Besides, McCully and the NG have been looking for her all these years. Where
would NG have sent the checks in the meantime?

Yes, with good reason. As many times as I've seen it,
it still moves me.

It's a great photo. Too bad the model has been living in dirt for two
decades while National Geographic profited from it.

From our perspective, yes. From her perspective, maybe not. We need to
remember that not everyone is materialistic. Some enjoy a simple life and
I've known a few, myself. I may wonder if they're just being weird or on a
tangent or what, moving off to the boonies, but it's their lives, their
choices. The NG website says that she doesn't want further contact and that
her family has moved her to a remote location. Since she's never known
another lifestyle, that doesn't seem odd to me.

We should also consider how strongly people's religions can mold their lives
and remember that she's a Muslim who apparently doesn't have a problem with
purdah.

--
~~Bluesea~~
Spam is great in musubi but not in email.
Please take out the trash before sending a direct reply.