Community service vs. copyright and ownership

[EchoesAbove]

First things first:
This topic started in a German furry forum and therefore has german laws as background. You will be asked to answer in a way that you seem right, which does not necessarily have to be what is 100% legally correct.

Situation
You're visiting a public event out of pure private interest. This could be a Suitwalk, a Convention or something similar. During this event you're taking a bunch of pictures with your camera. After the event, you upload your pictures to Dropbox, Facebook or whatever image hoster you use and share them with the community.

Background
Nowadays it's super easy to edit digital pictures in many ways and to use it for yourselves. As soon as you took the pictures, they are your creations, so you yourself may decide in which ways the photo may or may not be used. The idea how pictures should be shared can vary wildly. Multiple licenses which you can use exist, therefore adding conditions such as always having to name the photographer, a ban on editing or not being allowed to use the picture for commercial purposes.
(Note: By taking the pictures they are automatically copyrighted to the person who took the picture in Germany.)


Question
In what ways may a community use photos without prior consultation of the photographer when NOT planning commercial usage?

a)No restrictions. Everyone's free to use the pictures as they want.
b)Redistribution with naming the photographer.
c)Naming the photographer and NO edits to the picture itself (Exception: Cutaway for avatar usage)
d)No further redistribution. You may look, but not share.

a)-d) are just examples to give the entire thing some rought categories. Please comment and elaborate on why and how you think this should be handled.



Extra Information:
This topic came up when a photographer informed the participants of a suitwalk after uploading the pictures that he would be charging money for properly usable photos, prohibited cutouts and that anyone sharing them would have to face a lawsuit. While this is all fair when viewed from a purely juridical position, a lot of people were unhappy and complained, especially since that person had taken the group photo.

(I hope this is the right subforum. It said pictures only in the Photography subforum so I put it here. Please move if it should go there after all!)

[Obey138 (Matthew "Fluffy")]

Extra Information:
This topic came up when a photographer informed the participants of a suitwalk after uploading the pictures that he would be charging money for properly usable photos, prohibited cutouts and that anyone sharing them would have to face a lawsuit. While this is all fair when viewed from a purely juridical position, a lot of people were unhappy and complained, especially since that person had taken the group photo.

He is definitely taking it way too far.


I mostly use CC BY-NC-SA 3.0, if not mentioned otherwise.

[anoni]

I believe it depends on many mitigating circumstances on how the right holder should contain the rights.

If someone uploads their work to the internet, for non-profit reasons, and uploads it visible to the public. Than in my opinion that work is public domain, you have given the public access to use that work as they please and if someone uses it in a manner that you disagree with, you can talk to them and you can be against it, but in the end you uploaded freely. If however you didn't upload it visible to the public, have acquired a license of it or are doing it to make a living or for profit, then I believe you have access to safe guard your IP.

In the case of the photographer mentioned, I think he's a dick for holding the group photo for hostage, but if he didn't upload the photos to the internet for free and make them widely available, or he has a license to his work, then I believe he has right to safegaurd his IP and refuse access to other people accessing it. Others, however, could claim that they did not give permission for him to use their likeness in his photos, and any photos that contain them must be removed, or given freely, or else HE could indeed be facing a lawsuit of his own, though I'm not sure whether they'd have a case or not. So the guys a dick, but he can do what he wants, I just hope he doesn't expect to be called back to be a photographer for any furry events ever again.