# If someone takes a picture of you (without your permission), who owns the picture? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 10, 2021, 7:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-someone-takes-a-picture-of-you-without-your-permission-who-owns-the-picture/946146 "2021-07-10T07:54:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 27
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2021, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-someone-takes-a-picture-of-you-without-your-permission-who-owns-the-picture/946146/27 "2021-07-11T21:56:17Z")
> [@Bootb](#): > > There’s a difference between owning something and profiting from it. There is a difference, but as @bdgr notes, the distinction in the United States is a bit more complicated than that. > [@bdgr](#): > > You can use the photo for news. You can use the photo for art. You cannot make a mug out of the photo because it then becomes a product. You can’t use the photo in advertising, without a release. that’s why microstock and stock agencies require a release. As this suggests, the issue is not whether or not the photographer makes a profit from selling the photo; the issue is what particular purpose the photo is used for. A photographer taking a picture of people gathering in the park on a sunny day could sell it to a newspaper seeking to illustrate a story about the great weather in the city over the weekend, but could not sell it to a pharmaceutical company seeking to use it for advertising sunscreen. Or rather, the photographer _could_ sell it to the pharmaceutical company, but without a model release they’re not going to be able to use it in an advertisement. There was actually an interesting case about this sort of thing a few years back. The recording artist Bruno Mars and his record company posted, on his official Instagram page, a picture of him as a kid. The picture had been taken, back in 1989, by a professional photographer. Despite the fact that the photo was of Mars himself, the photographer sued Mars and the record company for copyright infringement. The suit ended up settling out of court, mainly because Mars and the record company didn’t have a leg to stand on. > **[Bruno Mars Sued by Photographer for Sharing Childhood Photo](https://petapixel.com/2017/11/27/bruno-mars-sued-photographer-sharing-childhood-photo/)** > > Singer Bruno Mars is being sued by a photographer after he posted a childhood photo of himself on social media. TMZ reports that photographer Catherine --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-someone-takes-a-picture-of-you-without-your-permission-who-owns-the-picture/946146)._