Is this a question as to when I first started wearing ladies clothes?
It seems very strange to me that these guys, Swope and Hurst, were able to publish a bunch of relatively recent photos that they didn't take themselves. How does that work? Aside from the legal question -- which I am genuinely curious about; please explain it if you know! -- it seems rather ungracious to go barging forward and printing them for all the world to see without making even the smallest attempt to investigate who they're of and what the story is. Especially considering that they would have to realize the high likelihood that some of the people in the photos were still alive (as indeed they are). No?
In the August/September 2005 issue of BUST, there was a story about Casa Susanna with more pictures. I too was wondering about the consent laws.
IANAL and I haven't seen the book, but it's possible that given that the photos were found discarded the publishers believed that they could demonstrate a good faith effort made to obtain permissions from photographers or subjects.
(Is it just me or does the article, in spite of it's sympathetic approach still sound like another NYT "the author and his pygmy friends" story?)
"it's" s/b "its" of course. I hate when I do that.
Perhaps putting on the dresses could be construed as somewhat illogical... Although i do agree after putting on my 50's style dress for a good transvestite party in a 60's safe house i get a little out of hand...
This reminds me of the scene in Kavalier and Klay. Has anyone else read that book? The police apparently got a kick from going around and busting these places up, if you're to believe the book.