2 ms·
"clearly-identifiable" is not the criteria, it's a question of focus and respect. The articles of constitution this is based on in Germany read (roughly): "(1.
by eqvinox 2y ago
"clearly-identifiable" is not the criteria, it's a question of focus and respect.
The articles of constitution this is based on in Germany read (roughly): "(1.) Human dignity is inviolable. (2.) Everyone has the right to free expression of their personality, so long they do not infringe on others."
You can publish photos with identifiable people as much as you want, as long as the intent of the photo is not to capture one (or more) person specifically.
- ghaff 2y agoPeople take photos of other (unconnected) people who are the primary focus of photographs all the time--and publish them. Maybe they're not supposed to in some countries even in public but they do with great frequency.
- eqvinox 2y agoI'm not sure what your argument is… yeah, sure, it happens, in a lot of cases as the person in the photo you might not even know. And even if you do find out, a lot of people don't care — as long as they're not ridiculed. The petapixel post talks about exploiting people for views on social media, and you will get sued for that in D/A/CH. It's a bit like speeding. A lot of people, if not a majority, drives at 5% to 10% above the speed limit. Sometimes they get a (low-end) ticket. If you speed significantly, you likely still get away with it, but only for some limited time, and then (in most countries) you start racking up serious issues. None of this means that we should remove speed limits, stop enforcing them, or that they're somehow not helpful. It just means we're humans making rules for ourselves so we can live with each other, and things are usually not black and white.