Or is this because the subjects are minors? Or some other technicality, like whether or not the photos were taken in a public place or similar?
That people are so casual about what they post publicly online is nuts. That sites that exist pretty much solely to enable that bad judgement keep operating is nuts.
Personally I prefer the default to be legality, and make exceptions for things we want to be illegal, rather than reverse.
There's obviously more weight put on the freedom of expression side of the argument when it concerns journalistic endeavours than, say, a grandmother wanting to post pictures of her kids.
But I know some people who believe that a workaround involves both you and the information being physically in the US, and the information not actually being displayed anywhere in Europe. I don't know if such a case has actually been litigated, but I'd wager you'd be OK in that scenario.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2014/dec/04/i-cant...
Right, so it’s not as absolute as the original comment made it sound.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Street_View_privacy_con... for issues that arose in practice from pictures taken in public by Google.
But the way GDPR is written someone could come back years later, having changed their mind, and have a picture taken down. Perhaps a couple broke up and one party wants all photos with them together removed. I suppose that's OK, but implies a kind of curation (and an obligation) that isn't always easy.
The second is random passers-by who appear unintentionally (by all parties) the background of photos. On one hand, what expectation of tangental privacy should you have when you're out in the option and people can see you with their eyes? On the other hand, permitting this seems like it would open a mass surveillance loophole.
I can imagine a relatively easy fix for the latter, which is an automatic blur filter for those who aren't the "subject" of a photo, similar to what street view uses.
It goes against what we've been used to on-line, but it does make sense. Even without GDPR, I'd say basic manners would oblige you to take a photo down if a person featured on it asked you to.
We can only hope. No one has the right to post a picture of me on the internet anywhere ever for any reason.
If I take a photo of a crowd at an NBA game and publish it in a book of NBA photos, should any member of that crowd be able to force the publisher to stop selling the book until they've removed the photo? If not, why should it work differently on the internet?
If you're in public then you don't, generally, have a reasonable expectation of privacy, but if you're at home or at work then it's a different story.
As far as I'm aware, though, this hasn't been tested in court since the GDPR has come in to effect, but I would be surprised if the (UK) GDPR is not interpreted with that principal if and when it does.
pictures of a crowd don't give individual people depicted any rights, unless they are somehow the focus of the picture (say portrait shot with a crowd in the background).
Also, when you take a photo of a building the passer-by doesn't get rights to demand you not publish it, if he is merely an insignificant chance addition.
Unsurprisingly, all those "easy edge cases" that internet commenters believe to have found as the first person ever have already been thought through and handled.
Photographing in public for the sole purpose of taking a photo from you? No.
Here in Germany you are allowed to take photos in public, but you may not publish them in all circumstances. If a person is somewhere in the background it's fine. Also if it's a person of public interest. But you can not just follow anyone in public, take photos of them specificially and publish them. You may be required to take them down. Personality rights exist even in public.
> or posting images which are public record such as mugshots/booking photos?
In Germany (and many other countries) mugshots are not public records.
Nothing was stopping people from taking your picture and posting it around town, or in a classified ad or something before, nothing's going to stop people from doing it now.
The best thing to do is decide if it's a picture really worth being upset about existing and if it is, kindly talk to the people who posted it, otherwise it's probably not worth worrying about.
People that knowingly smile for a photo aren't really the people complaining.
Would you like picture of you posted by your family member on company's X platform to be used by company X for marketing purposes? I get your family member may not mind if their own pictures are used but you were never asked for permission. Would you want to be asked for permission?
What if you've not seen the photo, don't know who took the photo, or who posted it, or where they posted it?
Last year I had a drink with a group of friends in a pub, commemorating the untimely death of a friend one year before.
The following day, at work, a manager who wasn't present the night before asked me about the event the previous evening. He said he'd seen me "in the photos" on Facebook.
I'm not on Facebook, so I've no idea who took - or who posted - photos.
Suggestions?
Decide whether it's worth worrying about and if not, don't?
Was your boss angry about it? Or were they just making conversation about it?
One of those is worth worrying about, the other may be annoying but doesn't matter.
You can't control people. I dunno, even before everyone had cameras on them all the time I was taught to assume everything I did in public could be seen and maybe even be recorded by anyone, my dad was a bit paranoid, he taught me this as a child long before cell phones became ubiquitous. It's just the way it is. If you're in a public place, people can see you, people have cameras, the internet exists.
Again, I agree, I dislike pictures of me existing randomly, I try to avoid it. I'll dodge cameras and shit if I see someone taking pictures. But I know, inevitably, there's not much i can do about it. But I also realize, people tend to have short attention spans and memories and live in their own worlds so in the end it doesn't really matter and most people don't care enough to remember some random picture they seen of me anyway.