Portrait right is the right of citizens to agree or disagree with others to use their own portraits, and citizens' portraits are not allowed to be used without their consent, even if they are purely non-profit exhibitions.
Otherwise, it is illegal. The parties concerned may request immediate correction and deletion of the photos, and may bring a lawsuit to the people's court for compensation. If it causes great influence and brings harm and loss to the parties, it will bear criminal responsibility.
legal ground
Article 10 18 of the Civil Code: Natural persons have the right to make, use, disclose or permit others to use their own portraits according to law.
Article 120. If a citizen's right to name, portrait, reputation and honor is infringed, he has the right to demand that the infringement be stopped, his reputation be restored, the influence be eliminated, he apologize, and he may demand compensation for losses.
As we all know, Taikooli in Chengdu and Sanlitun in Beijing have always been the holy places of street shooting, attracting fashionistas, online celebrity bloggers and punch-in tourists. There are countless handsome men and beautiful women, and many photographers default to "shoot if they want". All kinds of street shooting chaos have actually violated the portrait rights of the subjects.
Just like when the photographer was preparing to shoot, although the photographer did not refuse at that time, he later posted photos or videos online without the photographer's consent, which was suspected of infringing on the portrait rights of others. Whether it is a photographer or a short video platform, it can be said that it is a typical infringement of portrait rights to publish photos or videos online without the permission of others and use the works for commercial purposes to attract a large number of fans and traffic.
Therefore, when the parties do not refuse to take pictures, it does not mean that the same photographer will disclose the images. Of course, the Civil Code also stipulates the rational use of the right of portrait, such as news reporting, showing a specific public environment, and inevitably making and publicizing the portrait of the obligee. But you know, street shooting does have a legal bottom line.
At this time, someone asked, in the photos taken by friends and friends, should I pay attention to this portrait? That's terrible!
Sun, an associate professor of civil and commercial law at East China University of Political Science and Law, believes that public portraits are often applied to a small number of acquaintances without explicit authorization.
For example:
You took a photo of having dinner with students and sent it to a circle of friends. If the students knew you were filming and didn't ask you not to make friends, then your public behavior didn't infringe their portrait rights. If students have opinions, this is also a problem that can be solved by morality and etiquette. It does not belong to the infringement of portrait rights, and some have expanded.
Anyway, how can you protect your privacy in this situation?
You can say "no" when you meet a street beat. Because the law does not prohibit shooting in public places. You should tell the situation directly. For example, if photos and videos involving personal portraits are published publicly, special treatment must be done or the explicit consent of the portrait owner must be obtained, otherwise corresponding legal responsibilities will be borne.
Finally, I'll say a few more words. For a long time, there is a common misunderstanding about street shooting:
Myth 1: You can't just shoot. Zhang and Li are the owners of the same community. One day, Zhang almost ran into Li's children playing in the driveway of the community. Li angrily took four photos and sent them to the owners' group, with the caption "Children need a safe environment for their growth, and road killers should be banned from the road". Zhang asked Li to withdraw, but Li ignored it. Later, Zhang couldn't stand the accusations and abuse of his neighbors, sued Li, asked Li to stop infringing on his portrait rights, and publicly apologized in the community to eliminate the influence. Finally, Zhang's request was supported by the court.
Myth 2: If the photographer doesn't object or refuse, it means agreeing to shoot. You should know that permission and authorization need to be clearly expressed, and it is good for everyone not to be clear. Disagreement means disagreement, which cannot be interpreted as consent unilaterally and cannot be filmed in the name of art.
Myth 3: agreeing to shoot is tantamount to agreeing to upload it online, which is similar to the photographer casually saying, "Can I take a picture for you?" It only refers to the authorization of portrait production and does not involve the authorization of portrait network communication. If the photographer makes a short video and uploads it to social media with the consent of the other party, it constitutes an infringement of portrait rights. The photographer has the right to ask the photographer and the platform to delete the video. If the photographer and the platform refuse to delete, both are infringement. Have you arrived yet?