Legal side of selling street photos

Four of a kind · 11-06-2021 4:03pm #1

What's the legal standpoint from selling images I've taken from the street that have people in them?

I'm currently doing a hometown photography project and eventually would like to be able to publish the photos in a local book and sell with proceeds going to a local charity.

However, I'm concerned about the rights of privacy when it comes to commercial photography. I understand that if someone is walking down the street and I take a photo with them in it, then that's fine (Within reason). But I'm not sure about the legal side of things if I wanted to use that photo to sell?

Anyone have any info that they could give me? Do I need model-release forms or something if I wanted to do that?

If that's the case, then how do all those other photographers publish their work with multiple people in their street photos? I'm sure they wouldn't have been asking permission from each person.

Just want to make sure I'm playing between the lines and not overstepping the mark.

Thanks in advance.

sumo12 · 14-06-2021 10:31am

My absolutely-non-legal opinion - blur the faces so people are not recognisable from a GDPR perspective and I would think you're fine to go ahead

PalLimerick · 14-06-2021 10:35am

There is no legal implications for you or anyone else. If its in public you can photograph it, or if it can be seen from the public property you can photograph it. Thats includes People and Property. You don't need their permission. You took the photo so you own the copyright.

14-06-2021 10:41am

PalLimerick wrote: »

There is no legal implications for you or anyone else. If its in public you can photograph it, or if it can be seen from the public property you can photograph it. Thats includes People and Property. You don't need their permission. You took the photo so you own the copyright.

The first part is correct but not the second or third

You can't stand in the street and photograph your neighbor getting changed in her bedroom.

You also can't sell it

magicbastarder · 14-06-2021 10:42am

that is true in terms of *taking* the photograph, but not in relation to selling it.

if the photo is to be used in a commercial context (i.e. used in advertising, etc.) you definitely need the permission of anyone recognisable.
if you're taking street candids and selling them as art prints etc., this is OK though AFAIK.

if it's for a local project, maybe just run the photos past a couple of locals first, not from a legal perspective, but just out of politeness maybe, so no noses end up out of joint?

TP_CM · 14-06-2021 10:44am

PalLimerick wrote: »

There is no legal implications for you or anyone else. If its in public you can photograph it, or if it can be seen from the public property you can photograph it. Thats includes People and Property. You don't need their permission. You took the photo so you own the copyright.

There might be some legal issues if kids are in the photos?

magicbastarder · 14-06-2021 10:47am

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

You can't stand in the street and photograph your neighbor getting changed in her bedroom.

worth separating out law related to photography with law related to antisocial behaviour.
AFAIK - and IANAL - the law states that you can stand on public property with a camera, point your camera in any direction, and take a photograph. very generally, if someone is doing something that can be seen from public property, that's their lookout.

however, the law - but not photography law - obviously does not allow you to harrass people. if you're perving on your neighbour deliberately, yes, it does become a legal issue but the photography is not the core issue, it's the harrassment.

The J Stands for Jay · 14-06-2021 10:56am

TP_CM wrote: »

There might be some legal issues if kids are in the photos?

No

14-06-2021 10:59am

magicbastarder wrote: »

worth separating out law related to photography with law related to antisocial behaviour.
AFAIK - and IANAL - the law states that you can stand on public property with a camera, point your camera in any direction, and take a photograph. very generally, if someone is doing something that can be seen from public property, that's their lookout.

however, the law - but not photography law - obviously does not allow you to harrass people. if you're perving on your neighbour deliberately, yes, it does become a legal issue but the photography is not the core issue, it's the harrassment.

'photography law' does not give you permission to take images of the inside of my property as you claimed. If it does, I would love to see the section and act.

Everyone has a reasonable expectation of privacy within their own home. It's reasonable to expect that people won't photograph you in your bedroom.

It's not reasonable to expect people won't glance in your sitting room window as they walk past.

You might consider what happened to the photographer that made money off techno Viking regarding commercial use

CelticRambler · 14-06-2021 11:00am

Not sure how rigidly this principle applies in Ireland, but in some jurisdictions if your picture is a "streetscape" with a primary emphasis on leading lines, contrasting colours, the play of light, etc, then including people, structures, branded products or other identifiable elements is legal. However, if the picture is clearly a photograph of that person, structure or brand (in the context of the same street) then you need the relevant permission before publication.

magicbastarder · 14-06-2021 11:06am

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

'photography law' does not give you permission to take images of the inside of my property as you claimed. If it does, I would love to see the section and act.

it's not the act, but (caveat is this dates from 2006)
"In general, you are entitled to take pictures of anything you wish, when in a public place. You may take pictures of private property, people, or anything else you fancy."
https://www.digitalrights.ie/photographers-rights/

slipperyox · 14-06-2021 11:11am

if you post this in the drone forum, you'll get the proper answer.

short answer, you can photo anything you want in public place, as you can already see it.

But how that photo is shared, may be an issue.

Remember we are all in cctv every day of the week, but tesco etc don't post it online, and when a clip is used on crimeline, blurring is made.

magicbastarder · 14-06-2021 11:23am

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

'photography law' does not give you permission to take images of the inside of my property as you claimed. If it does, I would love to see the section and act.

also, i would love to see the act which says you can't. generally laws forbid rather than allow, so it's quite possible there is no actual law to quote if it's legal (which is standard throughout the world). i.e. there may be no law which addresses it, so it's legal.

magicbastarder · 14-06-2021 11:36am

slipperyox wrote: »

Remember we are all in cctv every day of the week, but tesco etc don't post it online, and when a clip is used on crimeline, blurring is made.

not necessarily relevant, as tesco are generally using CCTV on their own private property.

magicbastarder · 14-06-2021 11:55am

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

You might consider what happened to the photographer that made money off techno Viking regarding commercial use

just spotted this now; as has been made explicit, commercial use requires permission. no-one argued otherwise.

being allowed take a photo in/from a public place, and what you do with that photo, are two separate issues.

slipperyox · 14-06-2021 1:13pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

not necessarily relevant, as tesco are generally using CCTV on their own private property.

In a public place

15-06-2021 1:01pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

it's not the act, but (caveat is this dates from 2006)
"In general, you are entitled to take pictures of anything you wish, when in a public place. You may take pictures of private property, people, or anything else you fancy."
https://www.digitalrights.ie/photographers-rights/

Digital rights is not a legal source but as you rely upon them, read further:

"Taking photographs of people in public is generally allowed – however, an exception is made where the subject would have a reasonable expectation of privacy. You’re perfectly entitled to take a photograph of someone walking down the street – but hiding in a tree to take a photo of them in their home may get you into trouble."

magicbastarder wrote: »

also, i would love to see the act which says you can't.

The constitution which states

"The dwelling of every citizen is inviolable and shall not be forcibly entered save in accordance with law"

Considering the acceptance within the constitution therefore that the dwelling is inviolable means that it should not be infringed upon save in accordance with law. So, is there a 'photography law' that grants one a right to violate the privacy of that dwelling?

Moving on thenm the ECHR which states:

"‘Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence."

This grants the absolute right to privacy within my private life and my home. So again, what 'photography law' (still waiting to be informed about this new section of law previously unknown to me) removed my right?

magicbastarder · 15-06-2021 1:15pm

i'm currently looking at google street view, in my neighbour's window. funny how they would be able to do that, and publish it worldwide, if it was illegal.

15-06-2021 1:46pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

i'm currently looking at google street view, in my neighbour's window. funny how they would be able to do that, and publish it worldwide, if it was illegal.

Great answer, Defo trumps the quote from Digitalrights.ie which YOU completely relied on as proof, the constitution, the ECHR and completely answers my request for the legislation that grants the right to zoom in on your neighbour as she gets changed.

In reality however its not, its a ****e answer that doesnt address the issue at all because You cannot see them or make out details. Its a picture of the house, not the internal contents and people. It does not invade privacy at all. In fact, if I was inclined, I could suggest that you didnt look at street view but instead made an assumption and then proceeded to post a lie based on that assumptio

Heres mine, can you see me or even identify my street based on the image that was taken in 2014?

Pay close attention to how the registration plates and anything identifiable in the windows have been blurred.

https://ibb.co/sFxw96W

sFxw96W

magicbastarder · 15-06-2021 2:25pm

i will say it again - you are allowed stand in a public place and take a photo. i can stand outside your house and take a photo. if i am doing it in such a manner as to constitute harrassment, e.g. appearing every morning at 9 to do it, then you can ring the gardai. but in general, once you are in a public place, you can take photos.

taking a photo of your house does not constitute forcible entry. to suggest that the line you quoted from the consitution means anything but physical entry strikes me as absurd. it does not mean i cannot take a picture of your house.

and you are reading the EHCR line wrong also. it says that 'everyone has the right to respect for his home' - the word 'private' clearly applies to life and not home there.

you've not found a law to actually back up your claims, which is what you were demanding of me.

in short - if i was walking past your house, and took a photo of the outside, please tell me what law i am breaking.

Oscar Madison · 15-06-2021 3:30pm

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

The first part is correct but not the second or third

You can't stand in the street and photograph your neighbor getting changed in her bedroom.

You also can't sell it

That is not what he said! That is maybe what you read into it but that's your issue!

The J Stands for Jay · 15-06-2021 3:52pm

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

"‘Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence."

This grants the absolute right to privacy within my private life and my home. So again, what 'photography law' (still waiting to be informed about this new section of law previously unknown to me) removed my right?

The bit you've quoted gives the right to respect for your home, not privacy.

16-06-2021 1:12am

magicbastarder wrote: »

i will say it again - you are allowed stand in a public place and take a photo. i can stand outside your house and take a photo. if i am doing it in such a manner as to constitute harrassment, e.g. appearing every morning at 9 to do it, then you can ring the gardai. but in general, once you are in a public place, you can take photos.

taking a photo of your house does not constitute forcible entry. to suggest that the line you quoted from the consitution means anything but physical entry strikes me as absurd. it does not mean i cannot take a picture of your house.

and you are reading the EHCR line wrong also. it says that 'everyone has the right to respect for his home' - the word 'private' clearly applies to life and not home there.

you've not found a law to actually back up your claims, which is what you were demanding of me.

in short - if i was walking past your house, and took a photo of the outside, please tell me what law i am breaking.

Gibberish. You demand what has been provided while changing your own stance and providing nothing. I have quoted the two highest legal papers in the country! Perhaps more lies about Google street view? No. You can't engage honestly.

McGaggs wrote: »

The bit you've quoted gives the right to respect for your home, not privacy.

What? The word privacy is even bolded.

Oscar Madison wrote: »

That is not what he said! That is maybe what you read into it but that's your issue!

I'm following the logical process. He said that once you are in a public place you can photograph anything. That's not true as I demonstrated with a simple scenario. There's limits.

The J Stands for Jay · 16-06-2021 8:54am

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

What? The word privacy is even bolded.

Let's look at what you quoted.

Everyone has the right to respect for:

- his private life
- his family life
- his home
- his correspondence

I'm not seeing the privacy of his home defended there

magicbastarder · 16-06-2021 9:25am

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

I have quoted the two highest legal papers in the country!

you also - i am guessing - are not a supreme court judge and don't seem qualified to interpret the constitution. because you're making a meal of it.

you explicitly asked me for the section and act i was referring to. i am explicitly asking you for the section and act of the law which bears up your claims. and the constitution is not the law.

17-06-2021 4:14pm

McGaggs wrote: »

Let's look at what you quoted.

Everyone has the right to respect for:

- his private life
- his family life
- his home
- his correspondence

I'm not seeing the privacy of his home defended there

Nor am I so its probable a good thing I am refering to the people inside the home and have stated that. My scenario was specifically a PERSON inside the home. Not the house on its own. Read my posts, I have consistantly spoken about and refered to the people inside.

magicbastarder wrote: »

you also - i am guessing - are not a supreme court judge and don't seem qualified to interpret the constitution. because you're making a meal of it.

you explicitly asked me for the section and act i was referring to. i am explicitly asking you for the section and act of the law which bears up your claims. and the constitution is not the law.

**** me. Right so, Im not going to bother after that

Legal side of selling street photos

Comments