Legal Implications of Sharing Intimate Photos: What You Need to Know

[aychamo]

I'm just curious ..

Say you have pictures of you and your other in compromising positions. What are the legal things with the pictures? If you both have them, are you free to do whatever you want? Or what?

 

[jcsd]

It's all down to who owns the copyright, which I think is usually the photographer.

 

[Crumbles]

Surely the photographer can't hold the copyright of the picture without the permission of the photographed subjects?

 

[aychamo]

Surely the photographer can't hold the copyright of the picture without the permission of the photographed subjects?

That's not an issue here. Permission is a given.

I always wonder about TV shows, because sometimes they'll blur out peoples faces, but sometimes they don't.

Like the news, they'll show a large crowd and all their faces appear and they don't get the peoples approval. But sometimes you have to have approval. Anyway, in the circumstance I'm talking about permission is given.

 

[jcsd]

Surely the photographer can't hold the copyright of the picture without the permission of the photographed subjects?

There are privacy laws to stop abuses, but I'm pretty sure that a photgraph is the intellectual property of the photographer.

 

[Crumbles]

Is that the case even if under 18s are subjects in the photographs? They always seem to blur out kids in newspapers and reports.

 

[motai]

I'm just curious ..

Say you have pictures of you and your other in compromising positions. What are the legal things with the pictures? If you both have them, are you free to do whatever you want? Or what?

Hmm.. I assume the illegal thing to do is to use the pictures to your advantage by blackmailing the people in the compromised positions in order to further your world domination scheme .

 

[check]

If you are in a public place where there is little or no expectation of privacy, you can be photographed and the photos can be sold. You have no legal rights to them.

 

[amwbonfire]

Under 18

If you are under 18 (and not in a public place) you need to give permission to the photographer for the photo to be legal.

 

[Monique]

I'm just curious ..

Say you have pictures of you and your other in compromising positions. What are the legal things with the pictures? If you both have them, are you free to do whatever you want? Or what?

I think you rather should be questioning the morality.

 

[aychamo]

I think you rather should be questioning the morality.

As soon as you find a universal authority on morality, let me know.

 

[amwbonfire]

I think you rather should be questioning the morality.

Yes, no one's asked what is in the pictures. I guess we're all not sticky-beaks...

What's in the pictures?

(Only joking)

 

[Artman]

I think you rather should be questioning the morality.

As soon as you find a universal authority on morality, let me know.

I think Monique was saying aychamo should question the morality. Hopefully each of us has our own sense of what is morally right or wrong.

 

[Monique]

Right, he's asking whether someone can feel free to whatever with pictures. At the same time he acknowledges the pictures are of someone in a compromising position.

I don't think it is very moral to do anything with pictures of someone in a compromising position unless you've got the clear consent to do so.

 

[aychamo]

Right, he's asking whether someone can feel free to whatever with pictures. At the same time he acknowledges the pictures are of someone in a compromising position.

I don't think it is very moral to do anything with pictures of someone in a compromising position unless you've got the clear consent to do so.

Thanks for the insight into your personal morality. What this has to do with the topic of this thread I'll never know.

 

[Moonbear]

I'm not sure the content of the pictures actually matters from a legal perspective, unless the acts portrayed in the photos would be considered illegal. In terms of ownership of the photos, I think it depends on whether you make a profit from their distribution or not. If you sold the photos to a publisher, or put them on a pay to view internet site, then you may owe part of the profits to the subject of the photos unless they have otherwise signed a waiver giving up their right to compensation. If you just pass out the photos to people for free, plaster them in the locker room, or hand them to the other party's boss, then while that may be a sleazy thing to do, I'm not sure there's much anyone can do about it as long as you shared the photos for free. I'm not totally sure about this though. There still may be something that can be done, for instance, if the person loses their job as a result and sues for damages due to the malicious action.