街拍是否侵犯肖像权?摄影师和律师请进!

看到很多街拍的片子,很好奇怎么能让大街上的人同意你拍他们的?是先拍再征询意见还是先征询意见再拍还是直接就拍。对于最后一种是否属于偷拍呢?想听听摄影师和律师的看法。在百度和google上搜了一些,看来意见不统一啊。英国的规定是怎样的呢?

百度
律师观点 :小心侵犯他人肖像权
部分律师认为,很多摄影爱好者认识上有个误区,觉得只要没丑化被拍者,没做商业用途,就不存在侵权行为。 实际上,如果仅仅是在公共场所偷拍不存在侵权,但只要是不经过当事人允许,拍摄特定的对象,并把偷拍照片公布传播,即便不是以营利为目的,除了用作新闻报道、公安机关为缉拿犯罪嫌疑人而发的“通缉令”等情况外,就应看作是侵犯了对方的肖像权。而且,在网站上发布这类照片,自然有吸引眼球、提高点击率、扩大网站影响的目的,很难说是非营利性的。照片一旦上网,难保被人恶搞或做不法之用,一旦这样就可能侵害被拍者名誉权,拍摄者、发布者、网站和恶搞者均应承担相应责任。而且,街拍活动也不是很受市民的支持,很多穿着时尚的俊男靓女在街上还不能坦然面对陌生人的镜头,以致不少“街拍”都变成了“偷拍”。为此,为了不侵犯肖像权,街拍图片在网上发布时应把脸部模糊掉,避免引起相关法律纠纷。

following from http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2012/04/14/photographers-rights-the-ultimate-guide/

Photographers Rights: Taking Pictures of People in Public

Are you breaking any law when you’re taking pictures of people in public? Probably not, but the position under UK law is uncertain.

There are currently no general privacy laws under UK law, but the UK courts must take into account the European Convention on Human Rights, which gives everyone the right to respect for their private and family life. As this is an area of law that has been developing rapidly over the last few years, it is hard to be certain what will constitute an infringement.

The key issue is whether the place the image is taken is one where a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy. For example, it has been suggested that the right of privacy of a child could be infringed by publishing a photo of them with their parents in a public street.

It is therefore advisable to be careful when taking photos intended for publication, even where the subject matter is in a public place. Failure to obtain a model release for the use of an image will certainly make it harder to sell the picture to stock libraries.

Photographing children
The same laws apply to adult and child subjects, but a child does not have the legal capacity to consent and a parent or guardian must therefore do so on their behalf. Be aware that schools, leisure centres and places where children and adults gather usually have their own photography restrictions.

Although decent photos of children (see our tips for better pictures of babies, children and teenagers) taken in a public place may be fine for non-commercial use, seek permission from the child’s parents or guardians and don’t shoot covertly with a long lens. For commercial images, you’ll need to get a model release signed by the parents.

拍小孩要征得大人同意,用长焦拍从外面拍别人家不行,好像就是这两条。
摆拍抓拍守株待兔都不一样的

你在英國竟然查百度?

There is no law against photographing children

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3559975/There-is-no-law-against-photographing-children.html

街拍的时候被拍摄者有权让你删除照片,但只要作品没有广告商业用途,就不存在侵权.放心的玩儿吧:)

对方让你删除照片,你需要根据对方需求删除与对方相关的照片。其他的没有关系。

我也是一个街拍狂 很厚脸皮的那种 遇到很多不同反应的对象 有友善的 还在你面前拍pose 有问你是不是拍他的 也有过叫你删除照片的

这个问题和“人类是否不应该再使用照相机”一样。

只要在户外拍照片,即使拍风景,难免会拍到路人,陌生人,占画面大小区别而已。

我是问过我以前一个学法律的学妹,如果你是故意拍对方的行为的,需要得到对方的许可。 否则对方有法依据告你的,如果你拍的风景啊,或者一些活动不小心把人带进去的,没有关系。 这界定于你是目的是什么。

你没有给人抽就算运气好了,以前就有个哥们爱乱拍,结果给四个黑人抽了,然后跑了,

我刚来英国时好些同学在路上看到小朋友就拍,人家家长看起来都不是那么乐意:L

我如果拍肖像的话我会先问,一般人你嘴巴甜点不会拒绝你的

要是我肯定不高兴,万一很丑给拍进去了 咋办?而且一般爱街拍的都不大愿意拍照(拍自己)!

如果你街拍没人阻止你,照片拍下来就是你的因为摄影师有copy right,但是有人要求你删除照片,你必须删除,否则他们有权起诉你。

另外,英国其实是有禁拍令的,理论上所有的公共场所都禁止拍摄,需要拍照的话要跟政府申请许可。只不过现在管的比较松,但是要是较起真来还是很容易惹麻烦的。

我5年前拍毕业作品的时候,那些个许可老麻烦了。都是学校出面给我搞的,然后我拍片的时候周围4-5个保安大膀跟着,整的我可不好意思了。:lol

你是不知道几年前一次摄影师的集体抗议吧?当时那段时间比较敏感,在街上你把相机掏出来都不用拍,就会有人上来盘问。

[quote=“gaopeng911, post: 14, topic: 2568268”]
gaopeng911 发表于 2014-12-25 00:59
你是不知道几年前一次摄影师的集体抗议吧?当时那段时间比较敏感,在街上你把相机掏出来都不用拍,就会有 …[/quote]

not quite right

wikipedia:

Following a prolonged campaign, including a series of demonstrations by photographers dealt with by Police Officers and PCSOs, the Metropolitan Police was forced to issue updated legal advice which now confirms that ‘Members of the public and the media do not need a permit to film or photograph in public places and police have no power to stop them filming or photographing incidents or police personnel’ and that ‘The power to stop and search someone under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 no longer exists.’

我说的是几年前的那次大规模游行抗议,是2009-2010年的事。要是当时大家不闹现在也不会管的这么松。
政策放宽是在2010年中下旬才开始的吧。但是警察在对你的行为有质疑的时候依然有盘查的权利。
你再往下多看几行啊:

Terrorism Act 2000
Photography and Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000
The power to stop and search someone under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 no longer exists.

Police officers continue to have the power to stop and search anyone who they reasonably suspect to be a terrorist under Section 43 of the Terrorism Act.

Photography and Section 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000
Officers have the power to stop and search a person who they reasonably suspect to be a terrorist. The purpose of the stop and search is to discover whether that person has in their possession anything which may constitute evidence that they are a terrorist.

Officers have the power to view digital images contained in mobile telephones or cameras carried by a person searched under S43 of the Terrorism Act 2000 to discover whether the images constitute evidence that the person is involved in terrorism. Officers also have the power to seize and retain any article found during the search which the officer reasonably suspects may constitute evidence that the person is a terrorist. This includes any mobile telephone or camera containing such evidence.

也就是理论上人类是不应该在自己房子外使用照相机?

英国不知道,美国这边是在public场所,photographer可以拍任何你想拍的包括小孩。
没人有权利让你删除照片。当然要publish,做商业用途之类就需要model release

没说不能用,就是告诉大家别太嚣张。做人要低调。

Sorry I pressed ‘反对’ by mistake - silly iPad