4 ms·

Who took the pictures? In a sane legal system it would boil down purely to who owns the copyright, barring an exceptional circumstance like revealing medical in

Who took the pictures? In a sane legal system it would boil down purely to who owns the copyright, barring an exceptional circumstance like revealing medical information. This privacy stuff has gone to absurd extremes. Soon it will be illegal to say someone's name without written permission over there. What a crazy legal landscape Europe is.

Barrin92 6y ago
In many European jurisdictions people have a 'right of their person to their own likeness', meaning that publishing pictures requires consent. This seems like a straightforward application of this, and more importantly gives the children power to control what information of them is on the internet. The European legal landscape is perfectly fine and gives children the right to put a limit on what their (grand)parents can do with their image. It protects the privacy of children, which honestly shouldn't even be controversial.
aaomidi 6y ago
What on earth are you on. My picture is mine. Not the person who took the picture. I hate family members who think they're somehow entitled to me and my body and my face. Like no. I will be the person deciding what I'm comfortable with.
- gnicholas 6y ago
  So do you just have a problem with people posting photos of you on social media, or even just having photos with you in them for their own memories? It seems like your critique would apply equally to both.
  - rootlocus 6y ago
    Do you go around projecting your memories on a public display accessible to anyone, any system, any algorithm, any time, possibly forever?
    - andromeduck 6y ago
      Not personally but some people do and it's their right to do so. It's basic right of expression.
  - aaomidi 6y ago
    Their memories die with them. Social media doesn't. I'm glad to see EU taking the necessary steps here.
- topkai22 6y ago
  In the US and presumably many other jurisdictions, that's not true. The owner of the copyright of the photograph is the one who took it, not the subject of the photograph, baring pre-existing contract arrangements. There are limits, but generally speaking if a photograph of an individual is taken in a public space it is owned by the photographer. This is the legal regime that enables a lot of journalism, good and bad.
  - aaomidi 6y ago
    And now we see a change in the legal definition per GDPR.
    - topkai22 6y ago
      GDPR doesn't affect the legal definition in the US or other non party jurisdictions. It has a pratical effect because few businesses or hosting platforms can avoid doing business in the EU, but the copyright regime in the US remains the same.
      - aaomidi 6y ago
        Sure, and now you see how laws actually impact people outside of their borders. The US has been the driving force behind this before, times have changed.
sage3 6y ago
Parents have the right to decide whether or not their children's picture should be public, what is so insane about this? Copyrights have nothing to do with this
wvenable 6y ago
If the grandmother took the pictures she would have copyright over them. But the GDPR isn't concerned about copyright but instead the handling of personal data. I don't think it's a stretch to consider one's photo to be personal data. Social media sites are mined for photos to be used for facial recognition apps. While you're concerned about the slippery slope of being able to post what you want online, companies and individuals right now are using your photo in ways you probably didn't imagine. I don't think it's clear cut.
raverbashing 6y ago
> In a sane legal system it would boil down purely to who owns the copyright Nope. Most countries have rights of image/personal rights in their laws
rootlocus 6y ago
> This privacy stuff has gone to absurd extremes. Maybe you don't care about it. But others do. And laws are for protecting everyone. There are lots of factors involved and many aspects to consider. Your conclusion of a "sane legal system" with only one exceptional circumstance "like revealing medical information" is just trivial and naive.
lgl 6y ago
> Who took the pictures? In a sane legal system it would boil down purely to who owns the copyright, barring an exceptional circumstance like revealing medical information. So I could just follow you around taking pictures of your face, kids, family, work, house, car, and then post a big beautiful album online since I would have... the copyright? You're ok with that, right? What a crazy legal landscape the US is.
- jimmaswell 6y ago
  Essentially, yes.

Barrin92 6y ago

In many European jurisdictions people have a 'right of their person to their own likeness', meaning that publishing pictures requires consent. This seems like a straightforward application of this, and more importantly gives the children power to control what information of them is on the internet. The European legal landscape is perfectly fine and gives children the right to put a limit on what their (grand)parents can do with their image. It protects the privacy of children, which honestly shouldn't even be controversial.

aaomidi 6y ago

What on earth are you on. My picture is mine. Not the person who took the picture. I hate family members who think they're somehow entitled to me and my body and my face. Like no. I will be the person deciding what I'm comfortable with.

gnicholas 6y ago
So do you just have a problem with people posting photos of you on social media, or even just having photos with you in them for their own memories? It seems like your critique would apply equally to both.
- rootlocus 6y ago
  Do you go around projecting your memories on a public display accessible to anyone, any system, any algorithm, any time, possibly forever?
  - andromeduck 6y ago
    Not personally but some people do and it's their right to do so. It's basic right of expression.
- aaomidi 6y ago
  Their memories die with them. Social media doesn't. I'm glad to see EU taking the necessary steps here.
topkai22 6y ago
In the US and presumably many other jurisdictions, that's not true. The owner of the copyright of the photograph is the one who took it, not the subject of the photograph, baring pre-existing contract arrangements. There are limits, but generally speaking if a photograph of an individual is taken in a public space it is owned by the photographer. This is the legal regime that enables a lot of journalism, good and bad.
- aaomidi 6y ago
  And now we see a change in the legal definition per GDPR.
  - topkai22 6y ago
    GDPR doesn't affect the legal definition in the US or other non party jurisdictions. It has a pratical effect because few businesses or hosting platforms can avoid doing business in the EU, but the copyright regime in the US remains the same.
    - aaomidi 6y ago
      Sure, and now you see how laws actually impact people outside of their borders. The US has been the driving force behind this before, times have changed.

sage3 6y ago

Parents have the right to decide whether or not their children's picture should be public, what is so insane about this? Copyrights have nothing to do with this

wvenable 6y ago

If the grandmother took the pictures she would have copyright over them. But the GDPR isn't concerned about copyright but instead the handling of personal data. I don't think it's a stretch to consider one's photo to be personal data. Social media sites are mined for photos to be used for facial recognition apps. While you're concerned about the slippery slope of being able to post what you want online, companies and individuals right now are using your photo in ways you probably didn't imagine. I don't think it's clear cut.

raverbashing 6y ago

> In a sane legal system it would boil down purely to who owns the copyright Nope. Most countries have rights of image/personal rights in their laws

rootlocus 6y ago

> This privacy stuff has gone to absurd extremes. Maybe you don't care about it. But others do. And laws are for protecting everyone. There are lots of factors involved and many aspects to consider. Your conclusion of a "sane legal system" with only one exceptional circumstance "like revealing medical information" is just trivial and naive.

lgl 6y ago

> Who took the pictures? In a sane legal system it would boil down purely to who owns the copyright, barring an exceptional circumstance like revealing medical information. So I could just follow you around taking pictures of your face, kids, family, work, house, car, and then post a big beautiful album online since I would have... the copyright? You're ok with that, right? What a crazy legal landscape the US is.

jimmaswell 6y ago
Essentially, yes.