[SteveA]

Originally Posted by Jonas Pilot

I don't believe that I need permission to take pictures of people in a public space as long as I'm not going to profit from the pictures. But I ask permission because sometimes I get close enough to the people where I "invade their space". I was also trying to get them to visit our great site so I told them where I was going to post the images and wether that was OK. I always ask if youngsters are involved.

Here is a response on the Canon Camera Forum. (the site is excellent and is very similar to the "Format" of the Winni.com)

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=864331

Re: What are the Laws on posting photos of people

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhuckelberry
yes, you are allowed to post the pictures. If not, parts of this forum wouldn't be here.

You only need permission when you are selling photos for commercial use. You can even sell them as art without a release, just can't sell them for advertising use.

Just a caveat: Where US state legislatures and courts have specifically defined it, "commercial use" refers to promoting a product or service other than the particular image in question. Selling that particular image is not "commercial use."

However, if you are offering your services as a photographer, then putting the photographs on your website as examples of what you can do for a prospective client is also "commercial use."

But if your website is purely a gallery and does not solicit future work, then it's "sale of art," which is permitted by the First Amendment (the courts have ruled that prohibiting an artist from earning a living through selling his art--including advertising the sale of that art--is an inhibition of his ability to create his art).

But, a further caveat: The First Amendment does not protect you from legal liability if you harm the subject by submitting her to "undue public humiliation and ridicule." In fact, it doesn't even protect the news media. The textbook example is a photograph taken by a news photographer of a woman at a carnival ride just as a gust of wind blew her dress over her waist. The newspaper published it as "Carnival Fun." The woman--a quiet suburban mother of two--sued for "undue public humiliation and ridicule" and won.

What is "undue public humiliation and ridicule?" The court will determine that based on the "reasonable man" concept. A shot of a man simply watching a baseball game would not be considered "undue public humiliation and ridicule," even if he was supposed to be at work, had called in sick, and his boss later saw the picture. The picture is simply of a man watching a baseball game.