5 ms·

> You don’t need their permission if… the people in the picture are participating in a public gathering, parade or similar event, and they are not the focus of

by scoot 2y ago

> You don’t need their permission if… the people in the picture are participating in a public gathering, parade or similar event, and they are not the focus of the photo The third picture focuses on an individual.

recursive 2y ago
That seems to be a subjective artistic interpretation. You could crop the un-focused one in a way that would be presumably focused. Is the cropping illegal? Is the photo retroactively illegal? I'm surprised that these laws exist because they seem so ambiguous to me. Sometimes I don't even know the focus of my own photos.
- em-bee 2y ago
  if you take photos for your own use and don't share them online then you will be fine. if you want to share them, making sure that people can't be recognized, like blurring the faces, should probably be enough. but IANAL
  - ghaff 2y ago
    >don't share them online ROFL. I suspect a lot of these laws/rules predate ubiquitous smartphone cameras and perhaps even widespread digital photography. Not that I do much in the way of "street photography" as such I'm pretty sure I have hundreds of photos online, including from Germany, that violate one or more of these rules.
    - em-bee 2y ago
      right, and for the most part that's fine too. i am not going to bother about my face showing up in your family album, whether you asked me or not. if you had asked, i'd probably have said yes anyways. however, the point of the law is that anyone downloading your album and exploiting it in some form is violating my rights just as much as you did if you didn't ask, and even more so if they make money off it, or defame my person, and so the law gives me the right to not only ask you to take the photo down, but sue those exploiters for damages. i am not going to sue you, because you didn't profit from the image. yours was an innocent mistake, and simply taking down the image will be enough for you. but if you had the legal right to take and publish my face without my permission, then i would not have the law on my side to stop anyone who is actively exploiting that.
- ongy 2y ago
  The cropped or re-focused image isn't the same as the original, at best a derivative. And yes, in general a photo of a larger gathering is fine, singling out any person is not. So the original would be fine, the derivative not.
- d1sxeyes 2y ago
  True, but I think a fairly uncontroversial one. The subject of the first photo is the Brandenburg Gate. The subject of the second photo is a climate change protest. The subject of the third is a man dancing.

by scoot 2y ago

recursive 2y ago

That seems to be a subjective artistic interpretation. You could crop the un-focused one in a way that would be presumably focused. Is the cropping illegal? Is the photo retroactively illegal? I'm surprised that these laws exist because they seem so ambiguous to me. Sometimes I don't even know the focus of my own photos.

em-bee 2y ago
if you take photos for your own use and don't share them online then you will be fine. if you want to share them, making sure that people can't be recognized, like blurring the faces, should probably be enough. but IANAL
- ghaff 2y ago
  >don't share them online ROFL. I suspect a lot of these laws/rules predate ubiquitous smartphone cameras and perhaps even widespread digital photography. Not that I do much in the way of "street photography" as such I'm pretty sure I have hundreds of photos online, including from Germany, that violate one or more of these rules.
  - em-bee 2y ago
    right, and for the most part that's fine too. i am not going to bother about my face showing up in your family album, whether you asked me or not. if you had asked, i'd probably have said yes anyways. however, the point of the law is that anyone downloading your album and exploiting it in some form is violating my rights just as much as you did if you didn't ask, and even more so if they make money off it, or defame my person, and so the law gives me the right to not only ask you to take the photo down, but sue those exploiters for damages. i am not going to sue you, because you didn't profit from the image. yours was an innocent mistake, and simply taking down the image will be enough for you. but if you had the legal right to take and publish my face without my permission, then i would not have the law on my side to stop anyone who is actively exploiting that.
ongy 2y ago
The cropped or re-focused image isn't the same as the original, at best a derivative. And yes, in general a photo of a larger gathering is fine, singling out any person is not. So the original would be fine, the derivative not.
d1sxeyes 2y ago
True, but I think a fairly uncontroversial one. The subject of the first photo is the Brandenburg Gate. The subject of the second photo is a climate change protest. The subject of the third is a man dancing.