Posting other people's photos on social networks article. The man specifically posed for a certain reward

Many people prefer to purchase high-quality photographic equipment used for photographing various sights, relatives and even strangers. Often such actions cause a negative reaction from other citizens. Therefore, every photographer should figure out whether it is possible to photograph a person without his consent. It also takes into account which places are not allowed to be photographed, where the photo is allowed to be used, and what the consequences of violating the law are.

Basic Rules

The legislation of the Russian Federation contains Art. 152.1 of the Civil Code, which talks about the protection of photographs of a citizen. It specifies all the rules related to creating photos. The law prohibiting photographing people without their consent indicates that in order to take a photo, it is imperative to first obtain the model’s permission. Although some points in this legislative act are considered not too clear.

The law regarding taking photographs of people without their consent states that photographs cannot be made public or used for any purpose without the permission of the people depicted in the image. If the model dies, then consent must be obtained from his heirs, represented by parents, spouses or children. In this case, is it legal to photograph a person without his consent? Taking photos is allowed, but you cannot use them for distribution or other purposes.

When is the law broken?

The law prohibiting photographing people without their consent will be violated in situations:

The photographer makes the images public, so unauthorized persons have unlimited access to them. By decision Supreme Court No. 25, publication is represented by actions that involve providing access to a photo by publishing it in various publicly available sources, for example, in the media or the Internet.
Using photos for other purposes. For example, they may be reproduced or sold, displayed at public events, or recycled. Even importing originals or duplicating them are all actions that require consent from the people in the image.

In all of the above situations, permission from the model is required. Many citizens are confident that it is forbidden to photograph people without their consent. Article 152.1 of the Civil Code only indicates that it is not permitted to use these images.

In what situations can you use images without consent?

Filming a person without their consent is a legal activity in most cases. However, there are even some cases when you can use the resulting images. These exceptions come in three varieties.

All these situations are prescribed in Art. 152.1 Civil Code.

Photos are used in the interests of the state or society

When answering the question whether it is possible to photograph a person without his consent, you can confidently answer positively. However, these images must be used carefully. If the photo shows a public figure represented by the President, a famous politician or a singer, then such photos can be distributed without fear that the photographer will be held accountable. To do this, you do not need to obtain the consent of a public person.

This is due to the fact that such citizens are significant figures for society and history as a whole, and therefore must be tolerant of interest in their person on the part of other citizens. Therefore, their photographs may be published in different sources.

Additionally, photographing people without consent is permitted if it is done in the public interest, for example:

the need for citizens to detect or expose threats posed to democracy;
preventing danger to the public or environment;
solving various crimes.

It is necessary to correctly distinguish between images that may be useful to society and those that do not carry any important information to the state and citizens.

Why can't you photograph people without their consent? This is due to the fact that people's privacy is violated. Even with regard to public figures, it is allowed to take their images in the process of their work, but their personal life must remain inviolable. Persons who are not engaged in public activities should not be specifically captured in a photo for the subsequent use of the image for profit or distribution for other purposes.

Photos were obtained as a result of shooting public places

Typically, images are taken of various events and attractions, which leads to the fact that other people are inadvertently captured in these photos. In this case, their rights are not violated. Without caution, you can photograph places:

open to the public;
various public events represented by concerts or competitions, conventions or exhibitions.

You can use such images for any purpose, even for distribution. But at the same time, it is not allowed for an unauthorized person to be completely placed in the entire photograph. The exception is the situation when the photograph was taken intentionally, and a specific person was purposefully captured, which can be quite easily understood from the photo.

If mass photographs are taken, it is advisable to obtain consent from at least one person. If he allows you to use this image for any purpose, then you do not need to take permission from others. An exception would be the situation when the image contains data about the personal lives of citizens.

The man specifically posed for a certain reward

In such a situation, the person acts as a model, so he independently agrees to create the image and receive payment for it. To prevent future disagreements, it is recommended to take a receipt from him indicating the following information:

Full name of the model;
the amount that was paid to the person for posing;
the date the photograph was taken and the funds were disbursed;
location of the photo shoot;
Full name and other information about the photographer;
model's signature.

It is with the help of such a receipt that the photographer can protect himself in the future from various claims or even legal proceedings.

If the payment for the model is the photographs themselves, then these relationships are also not gratuitous, so again a receipt is drawn up stating that the model received the payment presented in in kind.

If the model is presented by a minor citizen, then the receipt is drawn up by his official guardians.

A man posted his photos on the Internet

In such a situation, he independently makes his images publicly available. Even in this case, unauthorized persons do not have the right to use these photographs for their own purposes without obtaining the consent of the owner.

An exception would be the situation if photos are posted on sites whose rules indicate that all posted files can be used by the administration or other users for any purpose.

In what form is permission given?

Filming a person without their consent is prohibited for the purpose of distributing the images unless it falls within an exception. At the same time, a photographer often needs to take a photo of a certain citizen. In this case, you will have to obtain his consent to this process. It can be presented verbally or in writing.

Consent is represented by a certain transaction, and it is perfect if both participants behave in such a way that the expression of their will is clearly visible. An example would be a situation where a person is being interviewed on camera. In this case, he verbally consents to participate in the filming, so he will not be able to create obstacles in the future for the use of this video.

It is prohibited to photograph people without their consent for further distribution of the photo, so many people take advantage of this situation. They may verbally allow their photos to be taken, but then file a lawsuit in order to collect a penalty from the photographer or achieve other goals. Therefore, it is advisable to formulate such consent in writing, since such a document will act as a means of protecting the photographer.

When drawing up such a document, it is allowed to include in it different conditions, for example, it specifies how the images will be used, how they will be made public, and often even sets a period of time during which the photo can be used.

Filming in public places

Is it possible to photograph a person without his consent if the photos are taken in various restaurants, hotels or other similar establishments? If the main goal is to capture the situation or various objects, and people only accidentally fall into the frame, then this is a legal activity on the part of the photographer.

Owners of various public establishments can install different rules, which all visitors must follow, but they do not have the right to prohibit filming, since such prohibitions are contrary to law.

Taking photos on the street

You can photograph a person without his consent if he accidentally gets into the frame on the street during the shooting process. At the same time, the citizen himself should not be the central figure in the image, otherwise he can prove that he was the main target of the photographer.

If a person stands with his back or side in the image, and he does not perform any actions that are personal, then he will not be able to make a claim against the photographer.

Photography of objects of strategic importance

Such buildings include military facilities, the location of which must be secret to citizens of other countries. Their destruction or capture may affect the course of various military operations, therefore it is prohibited to distribute photographs depicting these structures. These include:

airfields or aviation bases;
naval bases;
warehouses designed to store nuclear weapons;
seaports;
political objects of significant size and significant significance;
large industrial centers;
power supply system components.

People should not take photographs in front of these objects, as this process is prohibited by law enforcement agencies.

Where can't you film?

It is not allowed to take photographs of people in different institutions, which include:

State Duma, and every person who visits this organization should not bring with him any equipment with which one can take photographs or videos;
courts or correctional institutions;
objects belonging to the customs service;
on the territory or in buildings owned by Gosstroy, the Ministry of Fuel and Energy or Rostransnadzor;
near the country's border, since filming requires permission from the head of the FSB border department.

For violating these rules, the owner of the equipment can be held not only administratively, but even criminally liable, since the dissemination of photographs taken by him can cause significant damage to the state or society.

Penalties for violations

Is it legal to photograph a person without their consent? This process is unlawful on the part of the photographer if the shooting is not in a public place and the photographs are planned to be distributed in the future. The purposeful creation of a photo of a specific person, which will then be used on the Internet or in the media, is a violation of the law, so different measures of responsibility may be applied to such a photographer.

If he does not use the resulting images for any purposes, then it will be impossible to make any claims against him. If they are used for distribution, sale or other purposes, then the person depicted in the photo can go to court. In the statement of claim, he indicates that damage to his life or health, as well as personal property, was intentionally caused.

For such violations, a photographer can be brought not only to administrative, but even to criminal liability, since he violates the integrity of privacy another citizen.

Various legislative acts are used to bring liability:

Art. 137 of the Criminal Code. It describes the possibilities for violating a person's privacy. Therefore, if information about a person’s private life is collected illegally or used for any purpose without his consent, this leads to the imposition of a fine in the amount of 200 to 500 minimum wages. Such punishment can be replaced by the citizen’s income received within two or five months. Compulsory work is often assigned for a period of 120 to 180 hours. Additionally, correctional labor may be applied for a period of up to 1 year. If there is evidence of a significant violation of human rights, arrest may be imposed for up to 4 months. In this case, in court, the plaintiff will have to prove that the photographer really revealed his personal or family secret, distributed the images without his consent, showed them publicly or only to a limited circle of interested parties, and also use them for personal gain to obtain a certain benefit.
Art. 151 Civil Code. It specifies the possibility of recovering compensation for moral damages from the photographer if it is proven that the photo was distributed and filmed without the person’s consent. The law of the Russian Federation takes into account that it is important to prove not only the existence of photos, but also their use for personal gain. Dissemination of images can cause moral harm to citizens, so they are subject to moral suffering. In this case, such damage is compensated by monetary payment. When calculating this compensation, the degree of harm caused, the guilt of the offender and other important circumstances are taken into account. The degree of human suffering is considered, for which his individual characteristics are studied.
Art. 11.17 Code of Administrative Offences. It describes the violation of the rules of behavior of people on different types transport. If people take photographs on board an air or water transport, as well as on a railway train, then this is a punishable act, for which a fine of 100 rubles is imposed. Additionally, officials will confiscate the photographs taken.

Thus, having figured out whether a person can be photographed without his consent or not, each photographer will take a responsible approach to creating different photographs. The need to obtain consent is taken into account if the citizen becomes the central figure in the photograph. Making images is allowed, but using them for any purpose is prohibited. If the photos are stored in the family archive, then their owner will not be able to be held accountable. If they are disseminated in the media or on the Internet, this may even become the basis for bringing a citizen to criminal liability.

Is it possible to post any other people's photos on in social networks etc. without permission?

Yes, you can’t even find the ends on the Internet))) no one will know what was stolen and what was stolen)))
Is it possible to post other people's personal photos on social media? groups, for example, VK, without the knowledge of the person depicted in these photos, but located on his VK page in the public domain to all users, and accompany these photos with non-offensive comments and without violating the privacy of his personal life?
Well, for example: “A very sociable girl” and a link to her page and a photo from her page.
For using other people's photographs with the aim of humiliating the honor and dignity of their owner, charges are 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 correctional labor for up to 6 months or restriction of freedom for up to 1 year.
from an internet cafe... piss yourself in your boots (legal advice)
The protection of images of citizens is regulated by Article 152, paragraph 1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (introduced by Federal Law of December 18, 2006 N 231-FZ) which, in particular, says:
Disclosure and further use of a citizen’s image (including his photograph, as well as video recordings or works visual arts, in which he is depicted) are allowed only with the consent of this citizen. After the death of a citizen, his image can only be used with the consent of the children and 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 state, public or other public interests;
2) the image of a citizen was obtained during filming, which is carried out in places open to the public, or at public events (meetings, conventions, conferences, concerts, performances, sporting competitions and similar events), except for cases where such an image is the main object 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 a person’s private life without his consent is not permitted
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 distribution of information about the private life of a person, constituting his personal or family secret, without his consent, or distribution of this information in public speaking, publicly displayed work or media mass media shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of up to two hundred thousand rubles or in the amount wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to eighteen months, or compulsory work for a period of one hundred twenty to one hundred eighty hours, or correctional labor for a term of up to one year, or arrest for a term of up to four months (as amended by the Federal Law of December 8, 2003 162-FZ);
2) the same acts committed by a person using his official position are punishable by a fine in the amount of one hundred thousand to three hundred thousand rubles or in the amount of the wages or 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 arrest for a period of four to six months (as amended by the Federal Law of December 8, 2003 162-FZ).
Thus, it is possible to film people, not for commercial use and without making them public, if they do not mind if the filming takes place in places open visit or at public events and you are not violating privacy laws. And if the person in your photograph is taken in close-up, obtain his written consent.
If a person posts his own photos on the internet, it is clearly with the goal that people will look at these photos, evaluate them, and even copy them.
And when posting other people’s photos, goals, motives and damage, if any, should be considered.
If you post a photo unknown girl and sign “this is the most beautiful girl in the world,” then that’s one thing.
But if you put the inscription “dates for everyone”, then something different)))
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 post photos
melodiously not varto zachipati privacy nsho people
oh, come on, post it. there are so many fakes now, and nothing.
Public figures are allowed (others are not allowed)...
The right of a voter to take photographs and videos in the voting premises is not expressly provided for by law. At the same time, the legislation does not contain a ban on such actions.
You can, but only if you ask!
A lengthy and lengthy trial with no result because judges are usually stupid... so-called. lay it out and it’s simply impossible to prove that you laid it out yourself; it’s always fashionable to draw up a contract of assignment
It’s possible, but no matter what this person sees!! 1
Well, if it was a photo of your friend.

In modern times of advanced technology, there is no person who is not immortalized in photo and video materials. Citizens capture personal memorable events through videography and appear in music videos and films. If video shooting is done on a voluntary basis, the process is pleasant and exciting. But citizens find themselves under the gun of cameras and not of their own free will.

It happens that a person gets into the frame without wanting to, and in some cases is not even aware that the video is being filmed. Most often this happens in public places. The law states that claims against the operator will not be justified 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 to obtain and produce information. In particular, he is allowed to film any materials in public places. The law does not allow directly interfering with the process of video filming, threatening the operator, and, moreover, taking physical influence on him.

Video recording of officials

Police, military, and officials are categorically against video recording. According to the law, they do not have the right to such a ban. Officials 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, as part of the anti-corruption campaign, the activities of state and district management organizations must be transparent and open. The law states that an official who interferes with video filming will be subject to administrative liability. If an official crime was captured through video recording this employee(for example, receiving or giving a bribe) or in some other way violated the law, his opposition to the operator in the future will be regarded as obstructing the investigation.

The law provides for the authority of citizens to personally monitor the quality of work and integrity officials. Any person by law has the absolute right to film while watching government officials state power, federal bodies, party members and officials when they are on duty. A citizen can act in this way both in personal and public interests. The legal right is secured by paragraph 3 of 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 recording 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 type of information.

Both professional and amateur video shooting is permitted in public places. Journalists and ordinary citizens have the right to organize video recording. Photographs or videos of a person taken in a public place cannot be regarded by law as an encroachment on the secrets of a citizen’s private life. The person who received and published such materials cannot be held accountable, even if there is a real desire to harm the reputation of the citizen filmed.

Filming children under 14 years of age is subject to the same laws. It is possible to photograph and film a child, but there is a risk of encountering misunderstandings on the part of the parents. A minor citizen can give independent consent to video and photo sessions only from the age of 14.

The law banning video filming in museums, theaters and concerts is nothing more than a myth. It is permissible to photograph people in front of works of art that are subject to copyright, if this work is not the main purpose of filming. 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?

On December 18, 2006, Federal Law No. 230-FZ introduced Art. 152.1 “images of a person.” According to the text of the article, the law prohibits personal or commercial use of the video in the absence of written permission from the citizens appearing in it.

The law prohibiting non-consensual filming 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 target of the video, his face was included in the frame by accident;
received at public events, such as a concert, strike, etc.;
is material about police officers in execution.

There are a number of provisions that prohibit filming people and objects in the following places:

In court buildings, correctional institutions (Arbitration Procedural Code, Art. 11, Part 7);
At State Duma meetings, if they are not open;
At military and other strategic sites;
At customs and border service points within 5 km from the border, according to the order of the Russian Federation of September 10, 2002.

Video filming in the specified places can only be carried out with the permission of authorized persons.

Punishment

The law does not provide for penalties for filming videos in public places. According to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, a citizen who collects video materials in places open to common use, does not infiltrate the personal lives of other citizens.

However, if the resulting video in some way defames, humiliates or insults the person appearing on it, this citizen has the right to demand that the video be removed from public access. In some cases, when it is possible to prove the deliberate collection of information about a specific person for the purpose of defamation, the initiator can be prosecuted under Article 138 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. To do this, you need to file a complaint with your local police department.

Read latest edition to find out more information about this issue.

Art. answers your question. 152.1 Civil Code of the Russian Federation:

1. Disclosure and further use of a citizen’s image (including his photograph, as well as video recordings or works of fine art in which he is depicted) are permitted only with the consent of this citizen. After the death of a citizen, his image can only be used with the consent of the children and 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 state, public or other public interests;

2) the image of a citizen was obtained during filming, which is carried out in places open to the public or at public events (meetings, conventions, conferences, concerts, performances, sporting competitions and similar events), except for cases where 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 those in circulation, copies of material media containing the image of a citizen, obtained or used in violation of paragraph 1 of this article, are subject to court decision withdrawal from circulation and destruction 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 various kinds commits if you don't want to. At the same time, there is a second paragraph that has a very broad interpretation, as a result of which it turns out that in fact you can be recorded in 90% of places. BUT! You need to understand that the legislator introduced this exception paragraph specifically so that in the specified places it would be possible to carry out video surveillance in order to record possible offenses.

If specifically regarding the filming of people, without publication, then according to the law, paragraph 2 applies here: “the image of a citizen was obtained during filming, which is carried out in places open to the public, or at public events, except for cases when such an image is the main object of use." Namely, the part where it says, “except for cases when such an image is the main object of use” - that is, if you are filming in a public place the public place itself and a person gets into the frame, then he cannot have any claims against you , but if you are mainly filming a person in a public place, then this is already illegal. An expert can determine what exactly you are filming.

>use of the image is carried out in state, public or other public interests;

The point is completely unclear. Here is my specific request: a person smokes in the entrance, and he lives in this entrance. This is prohibited by the administrative article, therefore he is violating. I can only prove this violation with photographic materials: it is logical that by the time the local police officer I called gets to the entrance, the smoker will have finished smoking and gone home. Can I take a photo of him while he smokes? Is it legal or illegal to do this? Judging by these points, no. So what then?

In this article, I will talk about the basic laws of videography and photography. Where and what can you shoot, and what can’t or is not recommended? What obstacles might arise? What responsibility does the law establish for obstructing photo and video filming?

Disclosure and further use of a citizen’s image (including his photograph, as well as video recordings and/or works of fine art in which he is depicted) are permitted only with the consent of this citizen. After the death of a citizen, his image can only be used with the consent of the children and surviving spouse, and in their absence, with the consent of the parents.

Such consent is not required in cases where:

2) the image of a citizen was obtained during filming, which is carried out in places open to the public and/or at public events (meetings, congresses, conferences, concerts, performances, sports competitions and similar events), except for cases where such an image is main object of use;

3) the citizen posed for a fee.

Article 152. Protection of honor, dignity and business reputation

[Civil Code of the Russian Federation] [Chapter 8] [Article 152]

1. A citizen has the right to demand in court a refutation of those discrediting his honor, dignity or business reputation information, unless the person disseminating such information proves that it is true. At the request of interested parties, protection of the honor and dignity of a citizen is allowed even after his death.

2. If information discrediting the honor, dignity or business reputation of a citizen is disseminated in the media, it must be refuted in the same media.

If the specified information is contained in a document emanating from the organization, such a document is subject to replacement or revocation.

The procedure for refutation in other cases is established by the court.

3. A citizen in respect of whom the media has published information that infringes on his rights or legally protected interests has the right to publish his response in the same media.

4. If the court decision is not implemented, the court has the right to impose a fine on the violator, recovered in the amount and in the manner prescribed by procedural legislation, to the income of the Russian Federation. Payment of a fine does not relieve the offender from the obligation to perform the action prescribed by the court decision.

5. A citizen in respect of whom information discrediting his honor, dignity or business reputation has been disseminated, has the right, along with a refutation of such information, to demand compensation for losses and moral damage caused by its dissemination.

6. If it is impossible to identify the person who disseminated information discrediting the honor, dignity or business reputation of a citizen, the person in respect of whom such information is.

Article 137. Violation of privacy

[Criminal Code of the Russian Federation] [Chapter 19] [Article 137]

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 a public speech, publicly displayed work or the media - is punishable by a fine of up to two hundred thousand rubles or in the amount of wages wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to eighteen months, or compulsory work for a term of one hundred twenty to one hundred eighty hours, or correctional labor for a term of up to one year, or arrest for a term of up to four months, or imprisonment for a term of up to two years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a period of up to three years.

2. The same acts committed by a person using his official position are punishable by a fine in the amount of one hundred thousand to three hundred thousand rubles, or in the amount of the wages or 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 term of two to five years, or arrest for a term of four to six months, or imprisonment for a term of one to four years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to five years.

What responsibility does the law establish for obstructing photo and video filming?

The main article that applies to illegal shooting restrictions is “Arbitrariness.” If it did not cause significant harm, then this is an administrative offense, liability for which is provided for in Art. 19.1 Code of Administrative Offences. If significant harm is nevertheless caused, then it is already a crime (Article 330 of the Criminal Code).

If a private security guard illegally interferes with filming, he may be prosecuted under Article 203 of the Criminal Code (“Excess of authority by a private detective or an employee of a private security organization who have a private security guard certificate, when performing their duties job responsibilities"). If a police officer does the same, then he is liable for abuse of office under Article 286 of the Criminal Code.

The same rules can be applied when deleting photographs from a camera’s memory card: the law (Civil Code) provides for the destruction of copies of a work only if these copies are counterfeit, that is, copyright was violated during their creation.

And the seizure of the camera itself or the flash card is already “robbery” provided for in Art. 161 of the Criminal Code, that is, “open theft of someone else’s property.” The cost of the seizure does not matter; the crime will be committed in any case.

If the security guards or staff of an establishment call the police in order to prevent allegedly “illegal filming,” it makes sense to ask the arriving police officers to bring the callers themselves to administrative responsibility. In this case, there is something called a “deliberately false call to specialized services.” Such “services” include police, firefighters, ambulance, and others.

In case of unlawful obstruction of someone from the election commission (for example, an observer) from filming at a polling station, such actions can be qualified as “obstruction of the work of election commissions” under Article 141 of the Criminal Code. Also for such actions there is a administrative responsibility under Article 5.6 of the Code of Administrative Offences.

Obstruction of lawful professional activity journalists are punished under Article 144 of the Criminal Code.

Owner commercial organization, which establishes a ban on photography for visitors, may be held liable under Article 14.8 of the Code of Administrative Offenses (“Violation of other consumer rights”). Let me explain, the consumer has the right to obtain information about goods and services in any legal way. Including using photos and videos. Therefore, signs on doors prohibiting photography and video filming in stores and other similar establishments fall under Article 14.8 of the Code of Administrative Offences. You have every right to photograph and/or videotape products, price tags, and display cases. The ban only applies to filming personnel without their consent.

Comment

258 Comments

Thanks for the useful article ^_^

answer

where did article 152 come from?

answer

Russian Civil Code

Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

answer

according to 14.8 Code of Administrative Offences, prohibition

according to 14.8 of the Code of Administrative Offences, the ban is only on filming personnel without their consent, what does this mean and what article regulates this. Thank you

answer

Here are the main articles and

I present the main articles and acts.

Excerpts from the Constitution of the Russian Federation

Article No. 29 clause 4. Article No. 44 clause 1. Article No. 55 clause 3. Remember, a ban on photography can only be imposed by federal legislation, and not by directors, managers, security guards, watchmen and owners at will. Although the owners love to do this. Links to what the store is " private territory" are unauthorized. Since the store is a place open to public access. Let's move on. “Fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation on culture.” Article 9. The priority of human rights in relation to the rights of the state, organizations and groups.

Human rights in the field of cultural activity have priority over the rights in this area of the state and any of its structures, public and national movements, political parties, ethnic communities, ethno-religious groups and religious organizations, professional and other associations.Photography is a cultural activity. In the field of cultural activities, amateur and professional absolutely equal rights.

This is all general provisions. Now for a specific case. The main materials can be found in the article "prohibitions on photo and video filming", chapter

Any person can ask you not to take it off, mind you - just ask. Law prohibiting photography of people in public and accessible places does not exist. It doesn’t matter whether they are at work, performing official duties, or just walking down the street. Therefore, the question to photograph or not is rather an ethical one. The only limitation is imposed on photographs where a person is the main object of the image, i.e. occupies at least 60% of the frame. And at the same time, restrictions are imposed not on photography (“for yourself” you can photograph anyone and as much as you want) but on the further circulation of the image. That is, posting on the Internet, social networks, media, and so on, without the prior consent of the person depicted. When using the image for advertising purposes, or for the purpose of selling the image. This restriction is lifted if the publication of the photo is of political, state or public interest. Or it is of an evidentiary nature.

answer

I just want to clarify for myself

I just want to clarify for myself) Is it possible to film, for example, a credit specialist when communicating with him (in order to further prove what or, for example he said that the interest rate on the loan would be 5%, but in the end, when the contract was signed, it became 18%)??? If he sees that a video is being filmed, he asks him to stop filming, am I obliged to stop filming?

answer

You have every right

You have every right, since in this situation you are a consumer of the service and the law on the protection of consumer rights is on your side, as well as the law on the right to collect information.

answer

and in the SC they refuse to film me

and in the SC they refuse to film the diagnostic process, pointing out the fact that the engineer conducting the diagnostics does not consent to video recording of himself and the work with his participation. In principle, video filming is allowed. But why should I film the service center when filming the process itself is important to me, because I won’t film his face, only his hands and what he says.

answer

You can only be asked not to

You can only ask do not remove. They cannot ban it - a direct violation of the legislation of the Russian Federation. Any restrictions are regulated only by the laws of the Russian Federation. More details in the article: Zap re you're on video and photography. Events that happen to a person in a public place, or when he is performing some public functions (for example, the activities of a civil servant) or performed by employees (the same engineer) official duties(being in the workplace) in general cannot constitute a “secret of private life”.Photography in public places can violate privacy only in cases where the photograph is taken of a person in a fitting room of a store, public toilet, bathhouse, etc. In this regard, the question arises - why do they so actively evade recording the process of providing services to the Consumer?

answer

Please tell me, what if I

Please tell me, if I come to a club and film a mass celebration (actors’ performance), do I need permission for this?

answer

No, there's no need for that

No, this is not necessary. Since the club provides a publicly accessible (public) service, it doesn’t matter whether it’s a performance by actors, just dancing, or a local skit - in any case, this is a public event and permission for photos is not required - video filming is not required. In this case, the law is on your side. Those who require permission for this are engaged in “arbitrariness”, Article 19.1 of the Administrative Code. If security guards or Chop employees interfere, call the police to prevent illegal filming, Article 19.3 of the Administrative Code. If this is the owner of a commercial organization (owner), then Article 14.8 of the Code of Administrative Offenses applies. And remember any employees security companies, Chopov and other organizations not entitled apply physical strength, or in any other physical way prevent your photo and video shooting, since this is already a criminal offense. The exception is “closed events”, access to which is provided by special permits or invitation cards. But you won’t get there that easily.

answer

Is video filming allowed?

Is video filming allowed in the workplace without giving consent?

answer

Allowed because this

Allowed because the place is open to the public. Prohibited only in special regime facilities.

answer

Hello, is it possible?

Hello, can a police officer film the actions of an ambulance crew while examining a patient and providing him with medical care? help without the consent of doctors and the patient himself? (action takes place on the street)

answer

Has every right and not

Not only the policeman, but anyone has every right, since the action takes place in a public place. In this case, there is no need to ask permission for photo and video shooting. A restriction is imposed on the further circulation of this video or photograph (publication in the media, Internet networks, demonstration on TV channels, etc.). This restriction is lifted if the publication (disclosure) is carried out by the state, public or other public interest. Article 152.1. Protection of a citizen's image

[Civil Code of the Russian Federation] [Chapter 8] [Article 152] [Clause 1]

answer

Good afternoon. Do I have the right

Good afternoon. Do I have the right to conduct video filming in the canteen of an enterprise with access control and can internal regulations restrict this right?

answer

You have every right

You have every right, internal regulatory documents refer to documents regulating work in production and workshops and have nothing to do with public catering (a factory canteen refers to public catering enterprises).

answer

And if the ban is justified

And if the ban is justified by the possibility of access to information that has a commercial secret (if you are allowed into the building, you have access to such information), and supposedly, by filming inside the building, I “can” film something that is not allowed)?

answer

Access to information available

Access to information containing a trade secret is strictly limited to a circle of persons. Even those working in this establishment (not to mention ordinary visitors) not everyone has access to these documents. Documents containing commercial secrets are stored in designated places where a limited number of persons have access and cannot be in areas for visitors. They are not a trade secret - documents are posted for public viewing and information. Exterior of the establishment interior interior, price tags and price lists, counters, racks, appearance dishes, menus, cash registers, etc. are not a trade secret. Separately, regarding documents - any documents to which visitors and ordinary employees (without access) have access are not a trade secret. In order to declare something a secret, commercial, state, military, strategic, etc., the first step is to restrict access to this item, object, etc. And they establish a strictly limited circle of persons who have the right to familiarize themselves. As I understand it, this is not the case in your case. The main article that applies to illegal shooting restrictions is “Arbitrariness.” If it did not cause significant harm, then this is an administrative offense, liability for which is provided for in Art. 19.1 Code of Administrative Offences.

answer

Hello! If I

Hello! If I am a VGIK student completing an assignment that includes taking photos and videos of other children, can their parents prevent me from doing so or force me to remove the materials?

answer

Doesn't matter student

answer

What if photographing a child?

What if the photograph of a child was taken in a kindergarten, and without any approval from the parents??? child 4 years old

answer

Photographing a child before

Photographing of a child before he reaches 14 years of age can be carried out only with the consent of his parents Neither the teacher nor the head of the kindergarten is authorized to give such consent. The photographer had to notify the parents in advance that photography would be taken and obtain their consent directly or through the teacher. Usually in such cases pre-registration is practiced. Otherwise falls under Article 16 of the Law “On the Protection of Consumer Rights” under the term “imposed service” and Article 19.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation “arbitrariness”.

answer

Hello, I say

Hello, you say I work as a fireman and at work I have conflicts that the manager does not keep his word, gives an order and a minute later says that he didn’t say that... and my solution is to work with a video camera to record everything that happens. The question is whether I can capture the entire environment at work. Is this government institution not a sensitive facility?

answer

Your wish is perfect

Your desire is completely valid. The law specifically emphasizes that special services which include firefighters, ambulance, police, rescuers from the Ministry of Emergency Situations, etc. can be recorded (filmed) without their consent. So you can. Photo and video shooting can only be prohibited the federal law. And he stipulates objects where photo and video shooting is prohibited, but the fire department does not apply to such objects.

answer

Please tell me if

Please tell me, if the guardianship authorities say that you can take a photo or video to prove that a person is preventing you from meeting and communicating with a child, are they right? Or should there be some kind of resolution for photos and videos?

answer

They are right, in evidence

They are right, permission is not required for evidentiary purposes. But only if this shooting is purely evidentiary in nature. Upload to open access This shooting is not allowed.

answer

Good afternoon, is he entitled?

Good afternoon, do you have the right to take pictures of us at the entrance? I was standing with a neighbor on the staircase (on the 3rd floor), talking about doctors, the hospital were looking at test results, an abnormal neighbor (from the 7th floor) who is not registered in this house and in this apartment ran out of the elevator, and began to take pictures of us, she says right to this? What is the law? Despite the fact that she was yelling that we had smoked the entire entrance, and how bad we were. We didn’t smoke and we didn’t even have cigarettes. What to do in such situations?

answer

Hello, no it does not.

Hello, no it does not. Firstly, she had to clearly indicate her intention to take photographs and secure your consent to this action(since, as I understand it, there was a personal photo shoot, and not a report on the street).

Article 152.1. Protection of a citizen's image.Such consent is not required in cases where:

1) the use of the image is carried out in state, public or other public interests;

2) the image of a citizen was obtained during filming, which is carried out in places open to the public and/or at public events (meetings, conventions, conferences, concerts, performances, sports competitions and similar events), unless such image is the main object of use;

Article 151. Compensation for moral damage

[Civil Code of the Russian Federation] [Chapter 8] [Article 151]

If a citizen has suffered moral harm (physical or moral suffering) by actions that violate his personal non-property rights or encroach on other intangible benefits belonging to the citizen, as well as in other cases provided for by law, the court may impose on the violator the obligation of monetary compensation for the specified harm.

When determining the amount of compensation for moral damage, the court takes into account the degree of guilt of the offender and other circumstances worthy of attention. The court must also take into account the degree of physical and mental suffering associated with individual characteristics the person who has suffered harm.

answer

Could you

answer

No problem. Send yours

No problem. Send your email address to my mailbox, the address is in the “about us” section, I will send it to you.

answer

Good day,

Good day, please tell me whether the store has the right to conduct hidden video recording in the goods unloading area, and then show the recording to my superiors?

answer

Hello, no it does not.

Hello, no it does not. Unauthorized covert video recording is prohibited by law. And depending on the consequences, it falls under the provisions of either the administrative or criminal code.

answer

Good afternoon I really want to

Good afternoon I would really like an answer to the following question:

A video and photo was taken at the police station of a suspect in a crime. The filming was carried out by a reporter; the suspect did not consent to the filming. The suspect was misled and thought he was giving evidence to the police. Later, these materials were posted on websites on the Internet, VKontakte and YouTube. After contacting the distributors of the photo, a response was received with the wording that the materials were received from the press service of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and everything is legal, there is some kind of law that allows such videos and photos to be published... What to do in this situation? Is there any way to get the materials removed and hold the distributors accountable? I really need your answer, your advice!

answer

To begin with, here is an extract.

Code of Criminal Procedure allows the investigator to photograph material evidence (Article 82), as well as attach photo and video documents to the criminal case, which can be examined when familiarizing with this case, as well as in court. In production investigative action, in accordance with Art. 166 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, audio recording, photo and video recording can be used, this is noted in the protocol. When examining (Article 179), that is, examining someone’s body, Filming may only be carried out with the consent of the person being examined. Unidentified corpses are subject to mandatory photography (Article 178 of the Code of Criminal Procedure).

At the same time, information obtained during covert operational-search activities, in accordance with Art. 12 of the law on operational intelligence, constitutes a state secret, it is processed and declassified in accordance with the law “On State Secrets”. Materials of the criminal case, in accordance with Art. 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, constitute a “secret of the investigation” and can be made public only with the permission of the investigator or inquiry officer, to the extent specified by them. Information obtained during public operational investigative activities in criminal cases is also protected.

The “secret of the investigation” is protected only until its completion, after which the investigator has no right to prohibit the disclosure of information. (An exception is situations when the investigation materials constitute a state or other secret protected by law). Go ahead.

Article 152.1 of the Civil Code, which provides for the protection of the image of a citizen, does not prohibit the receipt of such images, it can be violated only after their unauthorized publication and further use, that is, after it became available to an unlimited number of people without the consent of the person depicted in the photograph.

As I understand it, the suspect (note, not the accused!) did not give consent to the publication of the data and his image. The materials were obtained by misleading a person. In other words, by deception.

Code of Professional Ethics for Russian Journalists

When performing his professional duties, a journalist does not resort to illegal and in undignified ways obtaining information. The journalist recognizes and respects the rights of individuals and legal entities do not provide information or answer questions asked of them- except in cases where the obligation to provide information is stipulated by law.

The journalist adheres to the principle that any person is innocent until proven otherwise in court. In his communications, he refrains from naming relatives and friends of those people who have been accused or convicted of crimes committed by them, except in cases where this is necessary for an objective presentation of the issue. He also refrains from naming the victim of a crime or publishing materials leading to the identification of that victim. These norms are enforced with particular strictness when a journalistic report may affect the interests of minors.

A journalist disseminates and comments only on information of which he is convinced of the reliability and the source of which is well known to him. He makes every effort to avoid causing harm to anyone by its incompleteness or inaccuracy, deliberate concealment of socially significant information or the dissemination of knowingly false information.

A journalist is always obliged to act based on the principles of professional ethics set forth in this Code, the acceptance, approval and observance of which is an indispensable condition for his membership in the Union of Journalists of Russia.

As you can see, there is a whole list of violations committed. Contact site administrators with a request to remove illegally posted materials. In addition, with a statement to the prosecutor's office regarding the illegal publication of materials obtained by fraud. And to the management of the reporter who illegally posted the materials in the public domain. Not only did he violate the code of professional ethics of a journalist. He also illegally published materials before the end of the investigation and thereby tried to create public opinion still not really knowing guilty this person or not. I repeat once again, he is only a suspect!