I was asked this in the forums recently and thought it was worth a post.
What are the laws about photographing strangers?
To the best of my knowledge, photographers, as well as videographers are allowed to take photographs of any public event, place or person where there is not a reasonable expectation of privacy , which means if it is out in public, it is legally fair game. If it is in a situation where an individual is in a place that would be considered by most normal people as private, then they are off limits.
There are however some rules. Obviously, a person’s image or likeness or even property cannot be used to promote a commercial good or service without a model release. Paparazzi are able to take pictures of celebrities and sell them to newspapers or magazines because celebrities are considered “public figures” and because they are subjects of public interest, they can benefit from the sale of these photographs. There are also some new gray areas of these laws, as certain government buildings are now off limits, and the photographing of children without their parents’ consent may indicate a threatening behavior. (A good rule of thumb is to be careful and just ask if you are interested in taking a picture of a stranger). I get asked this a lot and it has never bothered me to have someone take my photo. 😉
Photographing on private property that is accessible to the general public, to my understanding, is fair game, unless it is clearly stated somewhere. Property owners that allow the general public access to their grounds may ask a person to leave, but they cannot demand your equipment or film if you have already taken an image. (Obviously it depends on the situation, as there are exceptions to this rule).
If I missed any tweaks on these rules, feel free to add them below:
Thanks for the post! This is a fascinating subject. I was recently screamed at by the owner of a pizza shop when he saw me snapping his store’s sign. I was very non-confrontational, and the situation was diffused. I think a lot of photographers are "right," but could end up in harm’s way because they refuse to defer to the person they’re dealing with. Being legally right is one thing, but having someone get angry and grab and/or smash your expensive camera is something else. Sure, you can sue, and perhaps win, but who needs the headaches. There are resources online for those who want to carry some documentation with them when they shoot. I would think this could be useful for cops (and mall cops) who feel they can flex their authority when they really don’t completely understand the laws about this pursuit. This seems like a good one: http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm
thanks for the article Scott- this explains it perfectly.