Do you need permission to take someone's picture in the US?

Answer 1

I believe the taking of a picture doesn't require any special permission or release. However, the USE of that picture may require it. In Canada there is an actual law preventing taking a picture of a person you do not know or a person who has declined having their picture taken. However, this law is rarely if ever enforced. Well there is always the possibility that they could rape you or something to do with Paranoia. No, as per Aubry Vs. Éditions Vice-Versa Inc (a case within The Supreme Court of Canada). But it really depends on what the subject is, if the person is not the subject then permission isn't required. Also, unless a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy (such as in their home, or a bathroom, for example), then taking a photo would be considered criminal voyeurism. And keep in mind, no one can force you to delete a photo, unless it violates Security of Information Act. Once taken, the photo is your property and is protected by the Copyright Act. After a photo is taken, it is your private property. If anyone forces you to delete a photo, it's considered criminal mischief. If anyone threatens to destroy your camera, it's criminal assault.

Sorry, but there is a 'privacy right' in Canadian law. Most people don't know their picture is being taken, but, if someone sees you take their picture and demands you delete it off a digital camera, or not use it they can sue you! * Jennifer Stoddart, Canadian Privacy Rights Commissioner said many of the street-level images Google is making available on the internet could break Canada's privacy laws. * Street View isn't yet available in Canada but has been expanding in the United States since being launched in May. * "I am concerned that, if the Street View application were deployed in Canada, it might not comply with our federal privacy legislation. * "In particular, it does not appear to meet the basic requirements of knowledge, consent, and limited collection and use as set out in the legislation." * Stoddart warned that high-resolution pictures such as those available on Street View could contravene the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, which came into effect on Jan. 1, 2004. * "Our Office considers images of individuals that are sufficiently clear to allow an individual to be identified to be personal information within the meaning of PIPEDA." "By the time individuals become aware that images relating to them are contained in Street View, their privacy rights may already have been affected." == ==

Answer 2

Yes. You may want to get them to sign a waiver, or something legal. You do not want to get in legal trouble later. It is the smarter thing to do.

Technically, if you are publishing on Facebook or MySpace, you do not need permission, but they may ask you to delete it.

It depends.

The person who took the photo (and, if the photographer did so as a company employee, the employer) is the legal owner of that photo. A photo of a star just walking down the street USUALLY is owned by the person who took the photo, while a publicity photo (the type that would look good) is most likely owned by a production company.

In all cases, you can not use any photo (or writing or artwork or just about anything created by human ingenuity) without the permission of the legal owner UNLESS the photo has gone into the public domain OR the usage is "fair use."

Also, every person has a "right to privacy" in the sense that nobody can use her/his image for personal gain, without prior permission. In general, a photo taken where a person has a "reasonable expectation" of privacy could not be used for any purposes. For celebrities, this legal right is severely, but not completely, reduced.

Furthermore, it is a general facet of U.S. law that everybody -- even celebrities -- has the right to control how his or her likeness is used by others trying to make a profit from that likeness. In some states this right is considered a property right, ie, it can be passed on after the death of that person, just like a house or a piece of art or a business. For example, an Indiana restaurant named "John Dillinger's" was forced to pay money to the heir of that criminal for use of Dillinger's name and image. On the other hand, Marilyn Monroe has been legally ruled as a resident of the state of New York, and thus, after her death, her image became free for anyone to use.

Strangely enough, considering how much money is exchanged in the publication of celebrity photos, there is no U.S. federal regulation of this issue, and there have been few Supreme Court rulings on the boundary between commercial usage of an image and free speech.

So the answer is, "If you plan to make money by using someone else's image or likeness, you'd best consult an attorney."

The general rule about using someone else's writing or artwork or image or anything else that legally belongs to that person, is that you should not do anything that would upset that person unless you first consult an attorney.

Answer 3

No you don't.

Answer 4

Yes yes