Law on video filming in public places. Is it possible to post any other people's photos on social networks, etc. without permission
A high-quality photo / video camera is now built into almost every phone. Video filming has become a part of Russian life, including public life. And than more people and objects enter the frame, the higher the risk that the photographer will be contacted with a claim. So that you are prepared for any situation, we will take a detailed look in this publication when shooting without consent is allowed, in what cases it is possible to publish photos on the network and what images lead to the fact that a photo is banned from sale.
What can be considered illegal filming
The question of “the legality of the acts committed” inevitably comes to everyone who decides to take up photography. And most often, proposals to turn off the camera come from people who do not know for sure the legitimacy of their own actions. However, the law clearly defines situations in which it is prohibited to film a person without their consent. Accordingly, if the situation does not fall under the case of a ban, absolutely everything can be filmed.
The above statement is supported by Article 29 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. According to the Basic Law, every citizen has the right to receive and disseminate information in any form by any means. Video and photography are part of the collection of information. And your right to collect information in this way is protected by law.
The Law on Information also enshrines the right of a citizen to freely film where it is not prohibited. Article 7 of the Law defines the concept of “information”, i.e. shooting objects. According to it, information to which there is no restriction on access is classified as publicly available. Accordingly, each person can use this data at their own discretion.
A reasonable question arises: what to do if you are told that shooting is not allowed? The answer is also contained in the Law on Information. Article 9 of the Law determines that filming restrictions are set at the federal level. Those. personal initiative of a private or legal entity is not a ban.
Liability for attempting to interfere with lawful filming
Shooting in public places is allowed always and everywhere, regardless of the time of day or season. Restrictions are allowed only at the level of the Federal Law. Accordingly, any prohibitions established at the local level fall under the article “arbitrariness”.
If attempts to interfere with filming in a public place occur with the use of physical force, this falls under Article 330 of the Criminal Code. Law enforcement officers who try to illegally interrupt filming are liable in accordance with Article 203 and Article 286 of the Criminal Code for exceeding official powers.
Often, a person with a camera is put under pressure to remove the footage. This falls under Article 1252 of the Civil Code and is regarded as a gross violation of copyright.
An attempt to take away a memory card or a camera is considered as article 161 of the Criminal Code - “robbery”, i.e. an attempt to openly take possession of another's property.
The most “harmless” attempt from the standpoint of the law to interfere with the shooting is to close the frame with the body. But even for this, a person may be held administratively liable under Art. "petty mischief".
Filming with a hidden camera without consent: filming without warning and punishment for hidden video / photo shooting
Covert shooting devices are prohibited in Russia. There were precedents when people were held administratively liable not only for the fact that a private person was filmed without his consent, but also for the purchase of Chinese video cameras disguised as lighters and fountain pens. But it is important to distinguish between "covert shooting devices" and "unwarned shooting".
Important: If you knowingly glued the LEDs on the camera, and on the video you assure that you are not shooting, these are signs of the creation of a covert shooting device. At the same time, if you have a camera hanging around your neck and you simply did not warn the respondent that he was filming at the moment, this is not prohibited.
But the punishment for filming without consent may not come, even if the respondent was sure that the camera was turned off. To do this, before publishing, you need to change the voice and apply a blur effect to the video. Then the participant simply will not be able to prove in court that it is he who is in the video. This is exactly what journalists do when preparing television investigations.
What will happen for video and photography of people without their permission
Shooting in in public places allowed. But it is inevitably associated with getting into the frame of additional participants in the action in the form of random passers-by. The Civil Code (Article 152.1) protects the right of people not to be depicted in images. However, the Civil Code does not impose filming bans. This article requires the author of the image only restrictions on the distribution of materials. Those. You can publish photos only with the consent of the participants in the shooting.
In order for a person to demand restrictions on the distribution of photographs with his participation, it will be necessary to prove that he is the central figure in the composition.
For example: if the central figure of the photo is a monument, then there is no need to ask the consent of the tourists caught in the frame to publish the photo. If a person is located in the image in focus and in portrait mode, he is the central figure and his permission is required.
Important: This rule does not apply to civil servants on duty. Police, ambulance, fire service, security personnel, etc. Filming without consent individual V this case allowed in full if employees are on duty.
Responsibility for illegal filming of children and without parental consent
If the child is not the centerpiece of the frame, permission to film is not required. If you plan to talk to a child on camera, conduct a video survey on the street, etc., then such filming of minors without parental consent is unacceptable.
According to the law, a child can only consent to being photographed if he or she is 14 years old. Before reaching this age, permission to shoot is provided by a parent, guardian or responsible person (for example, a teacher if the child is a schoolchild or a teacher if the action takes place in a kindergarten).
It is forbidden to record interviews with children or conduct portrait photo shoots without parental consent, and then publish them later.
Important: As in other cases, the prohibitions apply to the further use of materials, and not to the taking of photographs (according to Article 152.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). In public places, shooting is allowed in any form.
Filming without consent on private property and in public places
Filming on private property without permission from the owner is prohibited. The inviolability of property is guaranteed by the fundamental law and Article 29 of the Civil Code. According to the article, the owner of the property has the right to dispose of it at his own discretion, incl. allow and prohibit video filming of property.
But this article is often used by store owners, outlets and restaurants. That is why at the entrances to such establishments we see the warning “illegal filming is prohibited”.
In this case, there is a direct violation of the law, because. public institutions are equated to public places, respectively, an unauthorized ban on filming and an obstacle to it leads to the legal consequences described above.
Important: If you are prohibited from taking photographs or filming videos in a service establishment, you should refer to the Consumer Protection Act. According to him, it is the responsibility of the staff to provide the most complete information about the product provided. And the consumer, in turn, has the right to record this information in any convenient way(including video and photo).
Moreover, Article 16 of this law determines that there can be no restrictions on photography and video filming, and only state institutions have the right to restrict it. A call to the police by staff will qualify as a “false call”.
An attempt to ban filming on the grounds of trade secrets is also doomed to failure. After all, the Law on Trade Secrets clearly defines the signs of information falling under this concept - according to the Law, only information with restricted access can be a trade secret. If the owner has not deliberately restricted access to information, then it cannot be recognized as a secret.
In the course of its professional activity photographers (and not only photographers) ask about the following questions:
- Can I post photos of people on sites on the Internet or position my photos in public outdoor exhibitions without the permission of the model?
- Can I sell photos of people without their consent?
- Can photos of a model be used in advertising without her permission?
- Can people be photographed without their consent?
- What is, When and Why do you need a model release?
- Can I, as a photographer, use photos without the model's permission?
- Should the agreement be oral or written?
- What if the model is underage?
The answers to these and other questions can be found in this article.
The general rule is that the model must agree!
There is one interesting article in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation - 152.1 "Protection of the image of a citizen", which just concerns photographers and models. On the one hand, this article answers a number of questions, and on the other hand, it raises new questions.
The basic rule says: the publication and further use of the image of a citizen (including his photograph) is allowed only with the consent of this citizen. After the death of a citizen, his image can be used only with the consent of the children and the surviving spouse, and in their absence, with the consent of the parents.
In other words, you can photograph a person without his consent.
A photographer can violate the rights of the person being photographed only when:
1. Reveals a photo, that is, it will open primary access to the photo to an unlimited number of people.
The concept of " promulgation" from point of view Supreme Court(clause 43 of the PPVS of the Russian Federation of June 23, 2015 No. 25) is the implementation of an action that makes this image available to the public for the first time by its publication, public display or in any other way, including posting it on the Internet.
2. Will start using the photo. The use of photography means: reproduction, distribution (including sale), public display (including on a website on the Internet), import of the original or copies of a photograph, processing of a photograph, etc. You can read more about what the use of photography is in the article: “What rights does a photographer have on a photo. Photographer's copyright.
When can photos be used without the permission of the model (person being photographed)?
In total, there are 3 exceptions to the general rule when you can use photographs without the permission of the model (clauses 1,2,3, clause 1, article 152.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).
Permission to release and further use of the photo not required in the following cases :
1. The use of the image is carried out in the state, public or other public interests.
This means that state, public and other public personalities have the right to a personal image in a narrower area than ordinary citizens. For example, you can use photos of the president, governor, etc. without their consent.
The decision of the European Court of Human Rights of June 24, 2004 contains the position of the national court that a certain “public person” is “ significant figure modern history and therefore [she] must tolerate the publication without her consent of the photographs in question, which were all without exception taken in public places.”
Interesting findings can also be found in judicial practice(PPVS RF dated June 15, 2010 N 16 "On the practice of application by the courts of the law of the Russian Federation" on the means mass media»):
TO public interest not any interest shown by the audience should be attributed, but, for example, the need of society to detect and disclose a threat to a democratic rule of law and civil society, public safety, and the environment.
It is necessary to distinguish between the reporting of facts (even highly controversial ones) that can positive influence to the public discussion of issues relating, for example, to the performance of their functions by officials and public figures, and the disclosure of details of the private life of a person who is not engaged in any public activity. While in the first case, the media perform a public duty to inform citizens on matters of public interest, in the second case they do not play such a role.
!! NEW CLARIFICATIONS Supreme Court
Without the consent of a citizen, the publication and use of his image is permissible when there is public interest, in particular if such a citizen is a public figure(occupies a state or municipal position, plays a significant role in public life in politics, economics, art, sports or any other field), and the publication and use of the image is carried out in connection with a political or public discussion or interest in this person is of social importance.
However, consent required if the sole purpose of publishing and using the face image is satisfying the philistine interest in his private life or making a profit.
No consent required to publish and use the image of a citizen, if necessary for the protection of law and order and state security (for example, in connection with the search for citizens, including those who are missing or who are participants in or eyewitnesses of the offense).
2. The image of a citizen was obtained during shooting, which is carried out in places open to the public, or at public events (meetings, congresses, conferences, concerts, performances, sports competitions and similar events) , unless such an image is the main object of use.
In other words, you can use a photo of a person who is in a crowd of other people, but you cannot use a cropped image where the portrait of this person is placed on the whole photo.
!! NEW CLARIFICATIONS Supreme Court(PPVS RF dated June 23, 2015 No. 25):
The image of a citizen in a photograph taken in a public place will not be the main object of use if, in general, the photograph displays information about the public event held at which it was taken.
By general rule if the citizens depicted in the collective photograph clearly expressed their consent to the photographing and at the same time did not prohibit the publication and use of the photograph, then one of these citizens has the right to publish and use such an image without obtaining additional consent to this from other persons depicted in the photograph, except in cases , if such an image contains information about the private lives of the specified persons.
3. Citizen posed for pay.
In this case, if the model was paid money for posing, it is necessary to take a receipt from her, which should indicate: the full name of the model, the amount she received, the date, from whom and for what she received the money, where, when and by whom the photo session was held (place) , signature. This receipt will protect the photographer from further claims of the model.
There is another option. It concerns shooting TFP, that is, when a model poses for a photographer for photos. In this case, the photos are payment for posing. This is not a free relationship. Therefore, in this case, a receipt must be taken from the model that, as payment for posing, the model received N number of photographs in digital or printed form.
If the model is a minor, a similar receipt should be taken from legal representatives - parents.
If a person himself posted his photos on the Internet: can they be used?
This question can be answered as follows (based on the PPVS of the Russian Federation dated June 23, 2015 No. 25):
1. Publication of the image of a citizen, including posting it yourself citizen on the Internet, and public accessibility such an image do not, by themselves, entitle others to free use such an image without obtaining the consent of the depicted person (with the exception of 3 cases where consent is not required).
2. At the same time, the circumstances in which a citizen places his image on the Internet may indicate the expression of consent by such a person for further use of this image, for example, if it is provided for by the terms of use of the site on which the citizen posted such an image.
In what form to give consent to the publication and further use of the image of a citizen?
The law allows oral, written form. Because consent is a deal. Also, a transaction is considered to be completed in the case when the behavior of a person reveals his will to make a transaction.
For example, if a person voluntarily gives an interview to a TV channel, then from his actions (posing for the camera, answering questions) indicate his consent to the further use of the interview with his participation, including his images.
But, so that in case of misunderstanding, the issue does not reach litigation, it is better, of course, to draw everything up in writing.
You can also include a number of conditions in the consent (if desired). For example, it is possible to determine the procedure and limits for the publication and use of an image (provide for the period for which it is given, as well as ways to use this image).
Is it possible to post any other people's photos in in social networks etc. without permission?
- yes, you can’t find the ends on the Internet))) no one will know what is stolen and what is sprto)))
- Is it possible to upload other people's personal photos in the social. groups, for example, VK, without the knowledge of the person depicted in these photos, but located on his VK page in open access to all users, and to accompany these photos with non-offensive comments and without violating the secrets of his personal life?
Well, for example: "A very sociable girl" and a link to the e-page and a photo from the e-page.
- For the use of other people's photographs in order to humiliate the honor and dignity of their owner, a charge is brought under Part 2 of Art. 130 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (insult). The sanction of this article provides for punishment in the form of corrective labor for up to 6 months or restriction of freedom for up to 1 year.
- with an Internet cafe ... piss even in boots (legal advice)
- the protection of images of citizens is regulated by Article 152, Clause 1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (introduced by Federal Law of December 18, 2006 N 231-FZ), which, in particular, says:
Publication and further use of the image of a citizen (including his photograph, as well as video recordings or works of fine art in which he is depicted) are allowed only with the consent of this citizen. After the death of a citizen, his image can be used only with the consent of the children and the surviving spouse, and in their absence - with the consent of the parents. Such consent is not required in cases where:
1) the use of the image is carried out in the state, public or other public interests;
2) the image of a citizen was obtained during shooting, which is carried out in places open to free access, or at public events (meetings, congresses, conferences, concerts, performances, sports competitions and similar events), except when such an image is the main subject use;
3) the citizen posed for a fee.It is also necessary to remember Article 24 of the Constitution Russian Federation: Collection, storage, use and dissemination of information about the private life of a person without his consent is not allowed
Responsibility:
the effect of article 137 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) Violation of privacy, which states that:
1) illegal collection or dissemination of information about the private life of a person constituting his personal or family secret, without his consent, or dissemination of this information in public speaking, publicly shown work or mass media are punishable by a fine in the amount of up to two hundred thousand rubles or in the amount of wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to eighteen months, or compulsory works for a term of one hundred and twenty to one hundred and eighty hours, or by corrective labor for a term of up to one year, or by arrest for a term of up to four months;
2) the same acts committed by a person using his official position are punishable by a fine in the amount of 100,000 to 300,000 rubles, or in the amount of the wage or salary, or any other income of the convicted person for a period of one to two years, or by deprivation of the right to hold certain positions, or engage in certain activities for a period of two to five years, or by arrest for a period of four to six months (as amended by the Federal Law of December 08, 2003 162-FZ).
Thus, for non-commercial use and without the publicity of photographs, you can shoot people if they do not mind if the shooting takes place in places open visit or at public events and you are not violating privacy laws. And if the person in your photo is taken close-up, get his written consent.
- If a person posts own photos on the Internet, then obviously with the aim that people look at these photos and appreciate them, and even copy them.
And with uploading other people's photos, the goals, motives and damage, when there is one, should be considered.
If you post a picture unknown girl and sign e "this is the most beautiful girl in the world," it's one thing.
And if you put the inscription "dates to everyone", then another))) - How would you like it if your photo was posted somewhere without permission?
- It also clearly states that any photo has a legal copyright holder. And in general - stealing is not good!
- of course it is possible
- Of course you can, it's our right to upload photos
- singly not varto zachipati privacy nho people
- oh yeah, post it. there are so many fakes now, and nothing.
- Public persons are allowed (others are not allowed) ...
- The voter's right to take photographs and videos in the polling station is not expressly provided for by law. At the same time, the legislation does not contain a ban on such actions.
- Yes, but only if you ask!
- A long and long trial without result, because judges are usually stupid .... so-called. lay it out and it’s simply impossible to prove who you posted it yourself, it’s always fashionable to draw up a commission agreement
- it is possible but that this person would not see!! 1
- Well, if it was a photo of your friend.
In the present times of developed technologies, there is no person who is not immortalized in photo and video materials. Citizens capture personal memorable events through video filming, filming in music videos and films. If video filming is done on a voluntary basis, this process is pleasant and exciting. But citizens find themselves under the guns of cameras and not of their own free will.
It happens that a person gets into the frame without wanting it, and in some cases does not even suspect about video filming. Most often this happens in public places. The law states that claims against the operator will not be substantiated on the basis of Article 29 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. In accordance with this article, a citizen has the right to use any means for the extraction and production of information. In particular, he is allowed to shoot any materials in public places. The law does not allow directly impeding the process of filming, threatening the operator and, moreover, taking physical action on him.
Video filming of officials
Police, military, officials are categorically against video filming. By law, they do not have the right to such a ban. Officials who are on duty can be photographed and filmed without hindrance.
According to Article 3 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On Combating Corruption", adopted on December 25, 2008 N 273-FZ, that within the framework of the anti-corruption campaign, the activities of state and district management organizations should be transparent and open. The law states that an official who prevents video filming will be held administratively liable. If by means of video filming the malfeasance of this employee was captured (for example, receiving or giving a bribe) or in any other way violated the law, his opposition to the operator in the future will be regarded as interfering with the investigation.
The law provides for the power of citizens to personally monitor the quality of work and the integrity of officials. Any person, by law, has the absolute right to film, watching representatives of the authorities state power, federal bodies, party members and officials when they are on duty. A citizen can act in this way both in personal and in public interests. The legal right is sealed by paragraph 3 of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of December 31, 1993 No. 2234, which has not lost its relevance in our time.
Law on Video Filming of Individuals
As mentioned above, the Constitution of the Russian Federation does not prohibit video filming of any person, even without his personal consent, if the video filming was made in a public place. The Civil Code similarly protects the rights to collect this kind of information.
Both professional and amateur video filming is allowed in public places. Journalists and ordinary citizens have the right to organize video filming. Photos or videos of a person taken in a place of public transmission cannot be regarded by law as an infringement on the secrets of a citizen's private life. The person who received and published such materials cannot be held liable, even if they really want to harm the reputation of the citizen filmed on the video.
Video recording of children under 14 is subject to the same laws. It is possible to photograph and film a child, but there is a risk of misunderstanding on the part of parents. A minor citizen can give independent consent to video and photo shoots only from the age of 14.
The law banning video filming in museums, theaters and concerts is nothing more than a myth. Photographing people in front of copyrighted works of art is acceptable if this work is not the main purpose of the shooting. By making a video recording of a full concert or performance and its participants for personal non-commercial purposes, a citizen, from the point of view of the law, does not risk anything.
When does the ban apply?
To the current Civil Code of the Russian Federation on December 18, 2006 federal law N 230-FZ Art. 152.1 "pictures of a person". According to the text of the article, the law prohibits the personal or commercial use of the video in the absence of written permission from the citizens appearing in it.
The Non-Consent Video Recording Act does not apply to video that:
- was created in the interests of the state;
- is part of the news block;
- the specified citizen is not the main purpose of the video filming, his face got into the frame by accident;
- received at mass events such as a concert, strike, etc.;
- is material about police officers on duty.
There are a number of provisions that prohibit filming people and objects in the following locations:
- In court buildings, correctional institutions (Arbitration Procedure Code, art. 11, part 7);
- At meetings of the State Duma, if they are not open;
- At military and other strategic facilities;
- At customs and border service points within 5 km from the border, according to the order of the Russian Federation of September 10, 2002.
Filming in these places can be carried out only with the permission of authorized persons.
Punishment
The law does not provide for punishment for video filming in public places. According to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, a citizen who collects video materials in places open to common use, is not introduced into the private lives of other citizens.
However, if the received video in some way defames, humiliates or insults the person appearing on it, this citizen has the right to demand the removal of the video from public access. In some cases, when it is possible to prove the intentional collection of information about a particular person for the purpose of discrediting, it is possible to bring the initiator to criminal liability under Article 138 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. To do this, you need to apply with a statement to the local police station.
Read latest edition for more information about this issue.
Your question is answered by Art. 152.1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation:
1. Publication and further use of the image of a citizen (including his photograph, as well as video recordings or works of fine art in which he is depicted) are allowed only with the consent of this citizen. After the death of a citizen, his image can be used only with the consent of the children and the surviving spouse, and in their absence - with the consent of the parents.
Such consent is not required in cases where:
1) the use of the image is carried out in the state, public or other public interests;
2) the image of a citizen was obtained during shooting, which is carried out in places open to free access, or at public events (meetings, congresses, conferences, concerts, performances, sports competitions and similar events), except when such an image is the main object use;
3) the citizen posed for a fee.
2. Manufactured for the purpose of introducing into civil circulation, as well as copies of material carriers in circulation containing the image of a citizen obtained or used in violation of paragraph 1 of this article, are subject to withdrawal from circulation and destruction on the basis of a court decision without any compensation. .
3. If an image of a citizen obtained or used in violation of paragraph 1 of this article is distributed on the Internet, the citizen has the right to demand the removal of this image, as well as the suppression or prohibition of its further distribution.
The situation here requires a certain legal literacy, not even from you, but from the judge. As you can see, there are first and fourth paragraphs that protect you from all sorts of fixations if you don't want to. At the same time, there is the second paragraph, which has a very broad interpretation, as a result of which it turns out that you can actually be fixed in 90% of places. BUT! It should be understood that the legislator introduced this paragraph-exclusion specifically so that in these places it would be possible to carry out video surveillance in order to fix possible offenses.
If specifically about the shooting of people, without publication, then, according to the law, paragraph 2 applies here: “the image of a citizen was obtained during shooting, which is carried out in places open to the public, or at public events, except when such an image is the main object of use". Namely, its part, which says, "except when such an image is the main object of use", - that is, if you shoot in a public place the public place itself and a person got into the frame, then he cannot have claims against you , but if in a public place you shoot mostly a person, then this is already illegal. Expertise can determine what exactly you are filming.
>the use of the image is carried out in the state, public or other public interests;
The point is completely unclear. Here is my specific request: a person smokes in the entrance, he lives in this entrance. This is prohibited by an administrative article, therefore, it violates. I can prove this violation only with photographic materials: it is logical that by the time the district policeman called by me reaches the entrance, the smoker will already smoke and go home. Can I take a picture of him while he smokes? Is it legal or illegal to do this? Based on these points, no. So how then to be?
