5 ms·

As long as the photo is taken from a public location, it is legal almost everywhere. US [0] “ In the United States, photographs that are taken for editorial us

As long as the photo is taken from a public location, it is legal almost everywhere. US [0] “ In the United States, photographs that are taken for editorial use in a public place generally enjoy Constitutional protection under the right of free speech.” Denmark [1] “ you can almost without restrictions shoot anything as long as what you're seeing is visible from public property. You are allowed to shoot people, including police officers or other government officials.” In Germany [2], you can photograph people from public locations but not if they are nude or vulnerable or in their home. “ You can’t take photos of people if it shows their helplessness.1 For example, you can’t take photos of accident victims, drunk people or nude people without their permission.” [0] https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/what-are-the-laws-regarding-paparazzi-31179 https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/what-are-the-laws-regardin... [1] https://law.photography/law/street-photography-laws-in-denmark https://law.photography/law/street-photography-laws-in-denma...

vincnetas 3y ago
one thing is to take pictures of things that you as a person see. i doubt that you can use these pictures any way you like. for example use them as magazine covers without consent of depicted person. provided its a portrait. or for example for tracking people that regulary walk through same place.
mcbutterbunz 3y ago
The link you posted [0] states there are limitations on the use. Places where you would have a reasonable expectation of privacy are not allowed to be photographed. Like at an ATM or in a public restroom.
- prepend 3y ago
  Indeed. There are limitations. Restrooms aren’t public, they are places where privacy is expected. The link I posted describes how in the US it’s perfectly legal to take a picture through someone’s open window (as long as you don’t trespass or do anything illegal to take it). My point isn’t that there are no limitations on photography or use. My point is that if you make something public, people can view it and use it. And that’s legal. People seem confused about this that somehow consent is required for use. Not for things publicly released. (In the US and many countries at least)
onli 3y ago
> In Germany [2], you can photograph people from public locations but not if they are nude or vulnerable or in their home. “ You can’t take photos of people if it shows their helplessness.1 For example, you can’t take photos of accident victims, drunk people or nude people without their permission.” Not how I learned it. You can take pictures of public spaces as long as a specific person is not the focus of the picture. The other aspects, like the invasion of privacy when a person is nude, only come on top of that. The law around questions like this is not definitive, so a lot depends on recent court decisions.
- prepend 3y ago
  The actual law is cited, so perhaps law changed since you learned it. Or you are just incorrect. According to German law and court decisions, it seems quite definitive. Although I know very little about German law, perhaps there’s some local law that supersedes regional, national, and EU law. What I try to do is track to the actual source rather than relying on my own memory of things.
  - onli 3y ago
    I see no link for the [2] in your comment. I sincerely doubt I'm wrong about this, you can read about it for example here: https://hoesmann.eu/fotos-von-gebauden-personen-und-marken-im-offentlichen-raum/ https://hoesmann.eu/fotos-von-gebauden-personen-und-marken-i.... It also explains under which exceptions pictures of a single person can be valid anyway, without explicit permission. > According to German law and court decisions, it seems quite definitive. That's impossible. Basically nothing is definitive in the german Medienrecht ;) Ok, not really true, but it's true that things can change and that it is a less defined area and you'd have to be really certain to know the relevant case law to be almost certain here.
    - prepend 3y ago
      I’m so sorry, I left out the citation and had in my clipboard. Here is is: [2] https://allaboutberlin.com/guides/photography-laws-germany https://allaboutberlin.com/guides/photography-laws-germany And it actually references the same article you posted.

vincnetas 3y ago

one thing is to take pictures of things that you as a person see. i doubt that you can use these pictures any way you like. for example use them as magazine covers without consent of depicted person. provided its a portrait. or for example for tracking people that regulary walk through same place.

mcbutterbunz 3y ago

The link you posted [0] states there are limitations on the use. Places where you would have a reasonable expectation of privacy are not allowed to be photographed. Like at an ATM or in a public restroom.

prepend 3y ago
Indeed. There are limitations. Restrooms aren’t public, they are places where privacy is expected. The link I posted describes how in the US it’s perfectly legal to take a picture through someone’s open window (as long as you don’t trespass or do anything illegal to take it). My point isn’t that there are no limitations on photography or use. My point is that if you make something public, people can view it and use it. And that’s legal. People seem confused about this that somehow consent is required for use. Not for things publicly released. (In the US and many countries at least)

onli 3y ago

> In Germany [2], you can photograph people from public locations but not if they are nude or vulnerable or in their home. “ You can’t take photos of people if it shows their helplessness.1 For example, you can’t take photos of accident victims, drunk people or nude people without their permission.” Not how I learned it. You can take pictures of public spaces as long as a specific person is not the focus of the picture. The other aspects, like the invasion of privacy when a person is nude, only come on top of that. The law around questions like this is not definitive, so a lot depends on recent court decisions.

prepend 3y ago
The actual law is cited, so perhaps law changed since you learned it. Or you are just incorrect. According to German law and court decisions, it seems quite definitive. Although I know very little about German law, perhaps there’s some local law that supersedes regional, national, and EU law. What I try to do is track to the actual source rather than relying on my own memory of things.
- onli 3y ago
  I see no link for the [2] in your comment. I sincerely doubt I'm wrong about this, you can read about it for example here: https://hoesmann.eu/fotos-von-gebauden-personen-und-marken-im-offentlichen-raum/ https://hoesmann.eu/fotos-von-gebauden-personen-und-marken-i.... It also explains under which exceptions pictures of a single person can be valid anyway, without explicit permission. > According to German law and court decisions, it seems quite definitive. That's impossible. Basically nothing is definitive in the german Medienrecht ;) Ok, not really true, but it's true that things can change and that it is a less defined area and you'd have to be really certain to know the relevant case law to be almost certain here.
  - prepend 3y ago
    I’m so sorry, I left out the citation and had in my clipboard. Here is is: [2] https://allaboutberlin.com/guides/photography-laws-germany https://allaboutberlin.com/guides/photography-laws-germany And it actually references the same article you posted.