Commons:Fotografies de persones identificables
Shortcuts: COM:IDENT • COM:PEOPLE • COM:BLP • COM:PIP
This page is considered an official guideline on Wikimedia Commons.
It illustrates standards or behaviors which most editors agree with in principle and generally follow. Feel free to update the page as needed, but please use the discussion page to propose major changes.
Quan es tracten fotografies de persones, s'ha de tenir en compte els drets legals i morals del subjecte. Aquests drets poden restringir o imposar obligacions a les persones que prenen, pengen o reutilitzen una fotografia. Aquests problemes són força diferents de l'estat dels drets d'autor de la foto. Una llicència de Creative Commons o un estat de domini públic, per exemple, significa que el propietari dels drets d'autor (normalment el fotògraf) ha renunciat o perdut determinats drets i que no es requereix el seu permís per utilitzar la foto. Tanmateix, això no afecta cap dret pertanyent al subjecte de la fotografia.
La publicació d'una foto d'una persona identificable en un lloc privat normalment requereix consentiment, i Commons ho espera encara que no ho requereixin les lleis rellevants. En molts països (especialment els de parla anglesa), publicar una foto senzilla d'una persona identificable en un lloc públic normalment no requereix consentiment, sempre que l'ús sigui no comercial. L'ús comercial (que aquí té un significat diferent del que té per als drets d'autor) normalment requereix consentiment. Tanmateix, els requisits de consentiment varien segons el país; en alguns països, fins i tot "fer" una foto requereix consentiment. Els requisits de consentiment també poden dependre d'altres factors.
A la majoria de països, aquests problemes només afecten les fotos on la persona és identificable i segueix viva. No obstant això, fins i tot si la persona no és identificable o ha mort, es poden mantenir certs problemes legals i ètics.
Qüestions jurídiques
Commons requereix que les fotos siguin legals en tots els aspectes següents: (a) el país on es va fer la foto; (b) el país des del qual s'ha penjat la foto; (c) els Estats Units (on s'emmagatzemen les imatges de Commons).
Hi ha dues formes de drets de la persona que regeixen la presa, l'allotjament i l'ús de fotografies en què el subjecte és una persona viva: el dret a la publicitat i el dret a la privacitat. També s'ha de tenir la precaució de no difamar al subjecte.
La plantilla {{Personality rights}} pot usar-se per advertir que per la reutilització del contingut de Commons les lleis locals poden imposar requisits addicionals, per sobre de les aplicades aquí. S'han de tenir en compte les lleis tant d'on es fa la fotografia com d'on es publica.
El dret de publicitat
Main: COM:personality rights § Likeness and persona
El dret de publicitat és el dret de controlar l'ús comercial de la pròpia semblança. L'exemple més evident d'això és en la publicitat (i s'aplica tant si l'anunci en si és amb finalitats comercials com si no). Aquest dret es refereix al tema de la fotografia i és diferent de la llicència de drets d'autor del fotògraf que pot imposar els seus propis termes o atorgar llibertats pel que fa a la reutilització comercial. Totes les imatges allotjades a Commons han de permetre la reutilització comercial gratuïta des del punt de vista dels drets d'autor, però el subjecte de la fotografia encara pot rebutjar el permís o exigir el pagament per aquesta reutilització. Tanmateix, aquest dret no afecta l'allotjament d'una imatge a Commons, rarament afecta l'ús d'una imatge en un projecte de Wikimedia i només és probable que afecti la publicitat o la reutilització comercials de la imatge. Tingueu en compte que en alguns països i estats, el dret de publicitat pot persistir durant un temps després de la mort del subjecte.
El dret a la intimitat
El dret a la intimitat és el dret que posseeixen les persones de poder excloure a les altres persones del coneixement de la seva vida privada i de la seva imatge. El dret a la privadesa està consagrat en diverses lleis internacionals, encara que els detalls respecte a les fotografies varien d'un país a un altre. Les imatges no poden interferir injustificadament en la vida privada o familiar del subjecte.
La llei sobre la privadesa de les fotografies es pot dividir cruament en si la fotografia s'ha fet en un lloc privat o públic. Un lloc privat és un lloc on el subjecte té una expectativa raonable de privadesa, mentre que un lloc públic és un lloc on el subjecte no té aquesta expectativa: els termes no estan relacionats amb si el terreny és públic o privat. Per exemple, una tenda de campanya a una platja és un lloc privat en terreny públic i un concert és un lloc públic en una propietat privada. Un lloc pot ser d'accés públic, però encara conserva una expectativa de privadesa pel que fa a la fotografia, per exemple, una sala d'hospital durant les hores de visita. Que el lloc sigui privat o no també pot dependre de la situació del moment: per exemple, la mateixa sala hospitalària hauria estat un lloc públic durant una visita abans de l'obertura.
In the United States (where the Commons servers are located), consent is not as a rule required to photograph people in public places.[1] Hence, unless there are specific local laws to the contrary, overriding legal concerns (e.g., defamation) or moral concerns (e.g., picture unfairly obtained), the Commons community does not normally require that an identifiable subject of a photograph taken in a public place has consented to the image being taken or uploaded. This is so whether the image is of a famous personality or of an unknown individual.
In many countries the subject's consent is needed to just take a picture, and/or to publish it and/or to use it commercially even if the person is in a public place. Further nuances may include the age of the subject, what the subject is doing at the time, whether the subject is famous, whether the image concerns news of public interest, etc. See the section on country specific consent requirements for details.
Because of the expectation of privacy, the consent of the subject should normally be sought before uploading any photograph featuring an identifiable individual that has been taken in a private place, whether or not the subject is named. Even in countries that have no law of privacy, there is a moral obligation on us not to upload photographs which infringe the subject's reasonable expectation of privacy.
Proportionality
In some countries, proportionality (fair use) is the main legal criterion of all exceptions. That means usual practices are admitted and tolerated by the law.
Difamació
Images must not unfairly ridicule or demean the subject. This may result simply from the content of the image but can also arise by poor choice of title, description or category. Defamation is both a legal and moral issue; therefore, Commons does not base decisions on whether the subject is able or likely to sue.
Empleats
If the photographer is employed while taking photographs, their actions may be subject to their employment contract or the rules of their professional body. For issues concerning medical staff and photographs of patients, see the essay Commons:Patient images.
Qüestions morals
Commons also respects the moral rights of the subject, even when not legally required to do so. These rights are reflected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 12:[2] "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation." Respecting these rights involves applying common decency and respect for human dignity. These issues are subjective and may depend on various factors, including the nature of the photo, the location, and the notability of the subject.
Sexualized photos that lack consent, sometimes called "creepshots", are morally unacceptable. Other photos, even if not sexualized, may also be morally unacceptable; examples include "downblouse" or "upskirt" photos or telephoto shots of nude sunbathers.
The way a photo is taken may make it permanently unacceptable, in the absence of consent, regardless of how it is edited. In particular, such photos remain unacceptable even if the subject is made unidentifiable.
In extraordinary cases, a photo's moral issues may be outweighed by its educational value. Commons may apply this principle in the same way as quality newspapers may apply a "public interest" test. This principle should be applied only where the photo cannot be replaced by a consensual equivalent and only where the photo's inherent educational value is sufficient to outweigh its moral issues. It is not sufficient for the photo to be in use on other Wikimedia projects. Commons is not required to host any photo of a person, and may delete doubtful photos regardless of educational value.
House rules
Some venues or events have "house rules" which apply to photography. For subjects other than people, Commons ignores such rules, regarding them as a matter between the photographer and the venue or event organizer. For example, a museum may prohibit photography, but Commons would ignore such rules when deciding whether to host photographs of art inside that museum. However, when house rules provide an expectation of privacy, Commons may respect such rules, even though it is usually not legally required to do so. In such cases, a photo of an identifiable person at that venue or event, where the subject has not consented to the photo being uploaded, may be deleted.
For example, while many conferences and conventions are considered public, some have photography policies that provide an expectation of privacy. Wikimania, the international conference about Wikimedia projects, allows attendees to use colored lanyards to indicate whether they consent or object to being photographed. Photos depicting identifiable people at such events, where those people are wearing "no photography" lanyards, are routinely deleted.
Consentiment
There are three main aspects of dealing with a photo: taking, uploading and re-using the photo. These aspects have separate consent requirements. In particular, consent to take a photo does not necessarily imply consent to upload the photo. It is the uploader's responsibility to ensure that any required consent was given.
Consent to take a photo is not consent for the photographer to do what they like with the photo. A photo on Commons will have greater potential exposure than one in a photo album, on a personal Facebook, or part of a user's Flickr stream. For example, a model may have consented to a photo being used in a personal portfolio, but may not have consented to the same photo being published on the Internet.
An example of consent that is too restrictive for Commons would be a typical patient photography consent form, which may only allow the photo to be used in medical journals or for teaching within the hospital. An example of consent that is more permissive than is required for Commons would be a model release, in which the subject gives up their right of publicity.
Evidence of consent
Commons may make certain assumptions about when consent has been given. At the most basic level, a subject looking at the camera and smiling would normally be assumed to have consented to the photo being taken. In some circumstances, however, verbal or even written agreement may be required. Where the subject of the photograph is also the photographer and/or uploader, consent is also normally assumed.[3]
However, some subjects are unable to consent, for example minors or people with limited mental capacity. In these cases, consent must be given by the parents or responsible guardians where it is required.
Normally, it is sufficient that the uploader asserts that appropriate consent was given. Where the subject is identifiable, the {{Consent}} template may be used for this purpose, but is not required. Please refer to the template documentation.
Criteris específics dels països
The table below may be used for indication specific requirements in various countries. Note though, that it is not a legally binding text and that because a country isn't listed here, it does not reflect a fact that everyone is free to take/publish/commercially use pictures of people in public spaces in that country. Further details, with references, may be found on Commons:Country specific consent requirements or by clicking on country links in the table.
| Country/Territory | Take a picture | Publish1 a picture | Commercially2 use a published picture |
|---|---|---|---|
| Afghanistan | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Argentina | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Australia | No (with exceptions) | No (with exceptions) | Yes |
| Austria | No (with exceptions) | No (with exceptions) | Yes |
| Belgium | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes |
| Brazil | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Bulgaria | No | No | Yes |
| Canada | Depends on province | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes |
| China, People's Republic of | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes |
| China, Republic of | No | No (with exceptions) | Yes |
| Czech Republic | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Denmark | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Ethiopia | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes |
| Finland | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| France | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions)[4] | Yes |
| Germany | No (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Greece | No | No | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Hong Kong SAR | Depends on circumstances | Depends on circumstances | Depends on circumstances |
| Hungary | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Iceland | No | No (with exceptions) | Yes |
| India | No | No (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Indonesia | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Iran | No (with exceptions) | No (with exceptions) | No (with exceptions) |
| Ireland | No (with exceptions) | No (with exceptions) | No (with exceptions) |
| Israel | No | No (with exceptions) | Yes |
| Italy | No | Yes (with exceptions)[5][6][7] | Yes[8][9] |
| Japan | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Libya | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes |
| Macau SAR | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Mexico | No | Yes | Yes |
| Netherlands | No | No (with exceptions) | No (with exceptions) |
| New Zealand | No | No | Yes |
| Norway | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Peru | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Philippines | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes |
| Poland | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes |
| Portugal | No (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes |
| Romania | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Russian Federation | No | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Singapore | No (with exceptions) | No (with exceptions) | No (with exceptions) |
| Slovakia | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| Slovenia | No | No | Yes |
| South Africa | No | No | Yes |
| South Korea | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Spain | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Sweden | No | No | Yes |
| Switzerland | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Turkey | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) | Yes (with exceptions) |
| United Kingdom | No | No (with exceptions) | Yes |
| United States | No | No | Usually (although laws differ by state) |
| 1:In this context of consent requirements, "publish" refers to "making public" and is separate from the term "publish" as may be defined elsewhere (e.g. U.S./U.K. copyright law).
2:In this context of consent requirements, "commercial use" is separate from, and not in reference to, licensing conditions that may prohibit commercial use (non-commercial licenses). Often commercial use in this context is contrasted with "editorial use", with the former referring to advertising and marketing purposes and the latter referring to news reporting and education even if made with a profit motive. | |||
Identificació
The degree to which a subject is identifiable varies. A photo that includes a clear view of the face is highly identifiable. Other features of the person's body, clothing or the location may help with identifying the subject. Outside of the photo, clues may be obtained from the title, description, origin, source URL, and metadata (including, but not limited to, the geolocation and date). The greater the privacy issues with photo, the more weight should be given to the risk of identification by non-obvious means. Whether the person is the main subject of the photograph, or a mere bystander or background detail is another important factor.
The risk of identification can be minimised by not including certain information in the description. However, some details regarding the origin of the photo (such as source URL and author) may be required by the source photo licence or Commons policy, so cannot be removed. It may also be possible to shoot the subject from a different angle or frame it differently.
It is better to obtain consent than to attempt to anonymise a photo that may require it. Placing a black band over the eyes was historically used to hide patient identity in medical publications but is no longer considered effective.[10] Pixelated features can sometimes be revealed by squinting one's eyes. Certain seemingly irreversible visual alterations such as applying a "twirl" effect over a subject's face may in fact be reversible.[11] These crude attempts to anonymise images may damage the value of an image to Commons to such a degree that it has limited or no realistic chance of being used.
Where the law forbids taking or publishing a photograph of a person without consent, and consent has not been given, then making the subject hard to identify (such as blurring their face) is unethical: the photograph should not be uploaded to Commons.
If the original or similar images are already present on the Internet (either on Commons or elsewhere) then attempts at anonymising the subject are ultimately futile. Content-based image retrieval engines such as TinEye or Google Images can identify a subject that has been anonymised. All of the following people are readily identifiable by anyone familiar with the subject. They may also be identified by computer, by simply dragging and dropping the image onto Google Images and searching for similar images.[12]
- Problems with attempts at anonymisation
-
Black band over the eyes -
Pixelated face -
Cropped head
Exemples
The following examples do not require consent in many countries:
- An anonymous street performer
- An anonymous person, in a public place, especially as part of a larger crowd
- People taking part in a public event at a privately-owned venue, for example, a press conference at an office building
- A basketball player competing in a match which is open to the public
The following examples typically require consent:
- A man and woman talking, entitled "A prostitute speaks to her pimp" (possible defamation)
- An identifiable child, entitled "An obese girl" (potentially derogatory or demeaning)
- Partygoers at a private party, unless press is specifically invited (unreasonable intrusion)
- Nudes, underwear or swimsuit shots, unless obviously taken in a public place – even if the subject's face is obscured (unreasonable intrusion)
- Telephoto images, taken from afar, of an individual in a private place (unreasonable intrusion)
Sol·licituds de supressió
The subject, photographer, or uploader of an image may request that it be removed from Commons. The reasons for removal may include such things as "It causes embarrassment" or "It was published without my consent", etc. Generally, images are not removed simply because the subject does not like them, but administrators are normally sympathetic to removal requests if good reasons can be given. In any case you may address a removal request through the normal public review process of a deletion request. If discretion is required, a deletion request explaining this may also be sent privately through Commons:Contact us/Problems.
Altres fonts d’imatges
Photographs with free licences that are hosted on other websites (such as Flickr) are often uploaded to Commons by users other than the photographer. This can make it difficult to ascertain whether consent was given. A free image licence only covers the photographer's rights and says nothing about the subject. It may be necessary to contact the owner of the photographs regarding permission from the subject, even though the licence means we do not need the photographer's permission.
Vegeu també
- Commons:Non-copyright restrictions – other non-copyright restrictions
- Commons:Patient images – on issues relating to medical images of identifiable people
- Personality rights – essay on personality rights
Enllaços externs
The following websites discuss the rights of photographers taking photographs in public places:
- Australia (NSW) - Australian street photography legal issues
- Canada - Canadian Photographers Coalition on Canadian Copyright Legislation
- Canada - Photography laws
- Czech Republic - Using photographs in advertising, Legality of monitoring of people, Recording policemen on duty
- EU - Perpetual image rights for the good: the proposed Dutch Cruyff provision on Supreme Court of the Netherlands 12/01825 TT/AS
- Germany, Switzerland and Austria - Recht am eigenen Bild
- Greece - The right to one's image
- New Zealand - Unlawful Photography in Public Places: the New Zealand Position
- UK - Photographers Rights Guide v2 (archive version) by Linda Macpherson LL.B, Dip. L.P., LL.M (a freelance legal consultant specialising in Media Law and Intellectual Property Law). See fourth column in the PDF.
- US - A Downloadable Flyer Explaining Your Rights When Stopped or Confronted for Photography and Photographers' Guide to Privacy (1999)
Notes and references
- ↑ Nussenzweig v. DiCorcia
- ↑ https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
- ↑ This raises an issue that is, while not strictly relevant to this guideline, a common source of confusion. Where the subject is the uploader but not the photographer, the upload may be a copyright violation: copyright is normally owned by the photographer, not the subject.
- ↑ Laurent, Olivier (23 April 2013). "Protecting the Right to Photograph, or Not to Be Photographed". The New York Times. Retrieved on 15 February 2015.
- ↑ Italy, Street-Photography and the Law (29 October 2013). Archived from the original on April 13, 2016. Retrieved on 15 February 2015.
- ↑ Monti, Andrea. Italian Law & Street Photography / What are you allowed to shoot?. Archived from the original on March 17, 2017. Retrieved on 15 February 2015.
- ↑ Art. 97. Legge 22 aprile 1941 n. 633 - Protezione del diritto d'autore e di altri diritti connessi al suo esercizio (G.U. n.166 del 16 luglio 1941) / Testo consolidato al 6 febbraio 2016 (DLgs 15 gennaio 2016, n. 8). Retrieved on 2020-05-05.
- ↑ Art. 96. Legge 22 aprile 1941 n. 633 - Protezione del diritto d'autore e di altri diritti connessi al suo esercizio (G.U. n.166 del 16 luglio 1941) / Testo consolidato al 6 febbraio 2016 (DLgs 15 gennaio 2016, n. 8). Retrieved on 2020-05-05.
- ↑ Italy's Supreme Court judgement (Corte di Cassazione), no. 36106/2023.
- ↑ ICMJE | Recommendations | Protection of Research Participants. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Retrieved on 2016-10-02.
- ↑ Schneier, Bruce (2007-10-26). Untwirling a Photoshopped Photo - Schneier on Security. Retrieved on 2016-10-02.
- ↑ Google Images (Search by image).