Some of the reality TV shows have made me wonder about this. Many of the people they show seem very unhappy about being filmed and I doubt they’d have given permission for it to be shown. They’re often in compromising situations or aren’t behaving at their best. I’ve seen footage of angry people at airports, others getting stopped and searched for drugs, drunk girls staggering along the street, etc. Also home videos where people have caught others on camera falling over, crashing their car or whatever, and cctv in stores catching criminals at work.
Is it legal to show this footage without the person’s permission, or without even asking? What about photos too. If someone took photos of me without my knowledge. Can they legally put those photos online?
When I worked as a TV journalist, we carried release forms with us. Whenever we filmed people who were not “public figures” but were identifiable on camera, we needed to have them sign a release form, giving us permission to air the footage. This did not apply to people in the background, but only to those who could be identified as being germane to the circumstances surrounding the filming. A person in a public place who can be seen in real time has no expectation of privacy in retrospect. The release form were used in situations in which a bystander might be asked to appear or speak in the context of the filming. If someone says something, then refused to sign the release, we can’t use it.
Case in point. Let’s say we wanted to do a feature on obesity, so we go out and get some random shots of fat people walking around. If the person can be recognized and identified, it is no-go, because it is editorially representing a private person as being fat. However, the footage can be used in general crowd scenes, in which the background people are not represented as being salient to the context, like if the feature wee about pedestrian safety…
Thanks for that. I guess these drunk/angry people must have given their permission for it to be shown. I can’t think why they would, unless they were paid. I wouldn’t want to be shown on TV looking like a fool.
You’d be surprised. As far as I know, shows like COPS and Cheaters and the like, if you see their faces, they’ve signed a release to be on TV. See this Mental Floss article
The rule of thumb is that if you’re planning to make money from the picture or video, you need the person(s) to sign a release form.
But whoever took the picture or video owns it, and (other than for money-making purposes) can do whatever he wants to with it without the permission of anybody in it.
It’s a bit more nuanced than that, and I would put the rule of thumb as editorial/informational/artistic use vs. commercial use. You can make money on selling the photos either way.
Generally, if it’s a news photo that is going to be used editorially or informationally you don’t require a release. If it’s going to be used commercially, you do. News photographers sell and resell their editorial photos all the time without any sort of releases–however, the market is more limited if you don’t have a release. (Back in my editorial photography days, a substantial portion of my income was resales for editorial work I did not have a model release for.) Now, of course, there are gray areas between editorial/informational and commercial use, and that’s when the courts come in. There’s also exceptions regarding art photography not requiring releases. And you can sell those photos.
There’s a difference, though, between the actual taking of the photographs and how they can be used afterwards. I can’t take a picture of the OP in a public place and then sell it to an advertising company as stock, for example. Heck, even in my studio as a privately commissioned portrait, I can’t sell it for stock unless I have a model release. Heck, unless they sign a release (which my clients do), I technically am not supposed to use it as promotional material for my own business, even.
Of course not. But most of those are not for commercial use. Once those videos/photos start getting used commercially, you’re opening up a can of worms.
Youtube has a mechanism where you can request they take down a video that displays your “image or full name” without your permission. Same as google maps, who will blur your face if it shows up in street view - I’ve got personal experience with that one.
It all seems rather complicated. So if some random person films me walking about the park/town, they can put it on YouTube with no consequences as long as they aren’t making money from it. Is that true? Even if I’m clearly identifiable?
The news certainly can. I’m not 100% sure about Youtube. I would think it’s okay, but I’m not certain, and it’s possible that Youtube would just delete the video if you complained to be safe.
What about those shots of folks punching people at political rallies? I don’t want to turn this into a hijack, but if a Trump supporter gets filmed punching a protestor, I seriously doubt that they’re going to sign a release for NPR.