Commons:Fotografies de persones identificables

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page is a translated version of a page Commons:Photographs of identifiable people and the translation is 32% complete. Changes to the translation template, respectively the source language can be submitted through Commons:Photographs of identifiable people and have to be approved by a translation administrator.

Outdated translations are marked like this.
Per

Per l'esquema de categories per a la gent, veieu Commons:Category scheme People

, vegeu Commons:Category scheme People.

Shortcut: COM:IDENT · COM:PEOPLE · COM:BLP

Other languages:
Bahasa Indonesia • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎Esperanto • ‎català • ‎dansk • ‎español • ‎français • ‎italiano • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎sicilianu • ‎svenska • ‎русский • ‎українська • ‎עברית • ‎العربية • ‎中文 • ‎日本語
Imatge presa en un lloc privat amb consentiment.

Quan es tracta de fotografies de persones, estem obligats a considerar els drets legals del subjecte i l'ètica de la publicació de la foto, a més de les preocupacions del fotògraf i del propietari de la imatge. Aquests problemes anteriors són molt diferents de la condició d'autor de la imatge i poden restringir o imposar obligacions en prendre, pujar o tornar a utilitzar una fotografia. Una llicència de Creative Commons o la condició de domini públic, per exemple, vol dir que el fotògraf (o un altre propietari) hagi renunciat o perdut certs drets i que no es requereix el seu permís per utilitzar la imatge. No obstant això, el fotògraf no pot eliminar qualsevol dret pertanyent al subjecte de la fotografia.

El consentiment del subjecte és generalment necessàri per publicar una fotografia d'una persona identificable presa en un lloc privat, i Commons espera el consentiment fins i tot quan les lleis locals no ho requereixen. En molts països (especialment els de parla anglès) el consentiment del subjecte no és necessari per publicar una fotografia directa d'un individu identificable presa en un lloc públic. No obstant això, hi grans variacions en els requisits de consentiment específics de cada país. Hi ha molts factors que poden determinar quan i en quin grau es requereix el consentiment.

En la majoria dels països, aquests problemes només afecten a les imatges quan la persona sigui identificable i segueixi viva. Certs aspectes legals i ètics poden restar vigents fins i tot si la persona ja és morta o no pot ser identificada.

Qüestions jurídiques

Hi ha dues formes de drets de la persona que regeixen la presa, l'allotjament i l'ús de fotografies en què el subjecte és una persona viva: el dret a la publicitat i el dret a la privacitat. També s'ha de tenir la precaució de no difamar el subjecte.

Una imatge és inacceptable Commons si és il·legal o possiblement il·legal, en el país on es va prendre la fotografia; o en el país des del qual s'ha pujat la imatge; o en els EUA (on s'emmagatzemen imatges Commons).

La plantilla {{Personality rights}} pot usar-se per advertir que per la reutilització del contingut de Commons les lleis locals poden imposar requisits addicionals, per sobre de les aplicades aquí. Tant de les lleis que fan referència a on s'ha pres la foto, com del lloc on s'han publicat.

El dret de publicitat

Patricia de León va permetre que la seva imatge sigui usada en un anunci antitaurí de PETA[1].

El dret de publicitat és el dret a controlar l'ús comercial de la semblança d'un. L'exemple més obvi d'això és la publicitat (si l'anunci és per a fins comercials). Aquest dret es refereix al tema de la fotografia i és diferent de la llicència dels drets d'autor del fotògraf, que pot impostar else seus propis termes o llibertats de subvenció en relació amb la reutilització comercial. Totes les imatges allotjades en Commons han de permetre la reutilització comercial lliurament del punt de vista del dret d'autor, però el subjecte de la fotografia encara pot negar el permís o exigir un pagament per aquesta reutilització. Aquest dret no afecta a l'hostatjament d'una imatge en Commons; poques vegades podria afectar l'ús d'una imatge en un projecte de Wikimedia; i és més probable que afecti als reutilitzadors comercials. En alguns països i estats, el dret de publicitat pot persistir durant algun temps després de la mort.

El dret a la intimitat

El dret a la intimitat és el dret que posseeixen les persones de poder excloure a les altres persones del coneixement de la seva vida privada i de la seva imatge. El dret a la intimitat està consagrat en diverses lleis internacionals, encara que els detalls pel que fa a les fotografies varien d'un país a un altre. Les imatges no poden interferir injustificadament en la vida privada o familiar del subjecte.

La llei sobre la intimitat respecte a les fotografies pot ser cruament dividit en si la fotografia va ser presa en un lloc públic o privat. Un lloc privat és un lloc en que el subjecte té una expectativa raonable de privacitat i un lloc públic és aquell lloc on el subjecte no té aquesta expectativa. Els termes estan relacionats amb si la terra és de propietat privada o pública. Per exemple, una tenda de campanya en una platja és un lloc privat en terreny públic i un concert és un lloc públic en una propietat privada. Un lloc pot ser accessible al públic, però encara conserva una expectativa de privacitat respecte a la fotografia, per exemple, una sala d'hospital durant les hores de visita. Si el lloc és privat o no pot dependre també de la situació en aquell moment: per exemple, la mateixa sala de l'hospital hauria estat un lloc públic abans que s'obris.

In the United States (where the Commons servers are located), consent is not as a rule required to photograph people in public places.[1] Hence, unless there are specific local laws to the contrary, overriding legal concerns (e.g., defamation) or moral concerns (e.g., picture unfairly obtained), the Commons community does not normally require that an identifiable subject of a photograph taken in a public place has consented to the image being taken or uploaded. This is so whether the image is of a famous personality or of an unknown individual.

In many countries the subject's consent is needed to just take a picture, and/or to publish it and/or to use it commercially even if the person is in a public place. Further nuances may include the age of the subject, what the subject is doing at the time, whether the subject is famous, whether the image concerns news of public interest, etc. See Commons:Country specific consent requirements for details.

Because of the expectation of privacy, the consent of the subject should normally be sought before uploading any photograph featuring an identifiable individual that has been taken in a private place, whether or not the subject is named. Even in countries that have no law of privacy, there is a moral obligation on us not to upload photographs which infringe the subject's reasonable expectation of privacy.

Proportionality

In some countries, proportionality (fair use) is the main legal criterion of all exceptions. That means usual practices are admitted and tolerated by the law.

Difamació

Images must not unfairly ridicule or demean the subject. This may result simply from the content of the image but can also arise by poor choice of title, description or category. Defamation is both a legal and moral issue; therefore, Commons does not base decisions on whether the subject is able or likely to sue.

Empleats

If the photographer is employed while taking photographs, their actions may be subject to their employment contract or the rules of their professional body. For issues concerning medical staff and photographs of patients, see the essay Commons:Patient images.

Consentiment

A hospital ward is a publicly-owned space where people have an expectation of privacy, so from the relevant point of view here, it is a private space.

Just as the circumstances of a photograph govern whether consent is required, they also influence the nature and degree of consent should it be required. There are three aspects: taking, uploading and using a photograph. At the most basic level, a subject looking at the camera and smiling might normally be assumed to have given their consent to have their photograph taken. In some circumstances, however, verbal or even written agreement may be required.

Consent to have one's photograph taken does not permit the photographer to do what they like with the image. An image on Commons will have greater potential exposure than one in a photo album, on a personal Facebook, or part of a user's Flickr stream. A model, for example, may have consented to the image being taken for a personal portfolio, but not for publication on the Internet. The photographer and uploader must satisfy themselves that, when it is required, the consent given is appropriate for uploading to Commons.

Some subjects are unable to give appropriate consent due to young age or because of learning difficulties. In these cases, the consent of the parents or responsible guardians should be sought.

For a self-portrait, where the subject of the photograph is also the photographer and/or uploader, consent is assumed, provided they are capable of giving appropriate consent (as noted above).

Normally it is sufficient that the uploader asserts that appropriate consent was given. The {{consent}} template may be used for this purpose, though it is not required. Please refer to the template documentation.

An example of consent that is too restrictive for Commons would be a typical patient photography consent form, which may only allow the image to be used in medical journals or for teaching within the hospital. An example of consent that is more permissive than is required for Commons would be a model release, in which the subject gives up their right of publicity.

Criteris específics dels països

The table below may be used for indication specific requirements in various countries. Note though, that it is not a legally binding text and that because a country isn't listed here, it does not reflect a fact that everyone is free to take/publish/commercially use pictures of people in public spaces in that country. Further details, with references, may be found on Commons:Country specific consent requirements or by clicking on country links in the table.

Consent required for action related to a picture of a person in a public place (by country)
Country/Territory Take a picture Publish a picture Commercially1 use a published picture
Afghanistan No Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Argentina No Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Australia No (with exceptions) No (with exceptions) Yes
Austria No No (with exceptions) Yes
Belgium No Yes (with exceptions) Yes
Brazil Yes Yes Yes
Bulgaria No No Yes
Canada Depends on province Yes (with exceptions) Yes
China, People's Republic of No No Yes
China, Republic of No No (with exceptions) Yes
Czech Republic Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Denmark No Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Ethiopia No Yes (with exceptions) Yes
Finland No Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
France Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)[2] Yes
Germany No (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Greece No No Yes (with exceptions)
Hong Kong SAR Depends on circumstances Depends on circumstances Depends on circumstances
Hungary Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Iceland No No (with exceptions) Yes
India No No (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Ireland No (with exceptions) No (with exceptions) No (with exceptions)
Israel No No (with exceptions) Yes
Italy No No[3][4][5] Yes
Japan Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
South Korea Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Libya No Yes (with exceptions) Yes
Macau SAR Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Mexico No Yes Yes
Netherlands No No (with exceptions) No (with exceptions)
New Zealand No (with exceptions) No (with exceptions) Yes
Norway No Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Peru No Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Poland No Yes (with exceptions) Yes
Portugal No (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions) Yes
Romania No Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Russian Federation No Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Singapore No (with exceptions) No (with exceptions) No (with exceptions)
Slovakia Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions) Yes (with exceptions)
Slovenia No No Yes
South Africa No No Yes
Spain Yes Yes Yes
Sweden No No Yes
Switzerland Yes Yes Yes
United Kingdom No (with exceptions) No (with exceptions) Yes
United States No No Usually (although laws differ by state)
1: In this context of consent requirements, "commercial use" is separate from, and not in reference to, licensing conditions that may prohibit commercial use (non-commercial licenses).
Template:Navbar/i18n/ca

Qüestions morals

While some aspects of ethical photography and publication are controlled by law, there are moral issues too. They find a reflection in the wording of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 12:[6]"No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation." Common decency and respect for human dignity may influence the decision whether to host an image above that required by the law. The extent to which an image might be regarded as "unfairly obtained" or to be "intrusive", for example, is a matter of degree and may depend on the nature of the shot, the location, and the notability of the subject.

The provenance of an image may taint its use irredeemably. A "downblouse" photograph is not made ethically acceptable just because the subject's face is cropped out. A paparazzi telephoto shot of a naked sunbather does not become acceptable merely by pixelating the face.

In the same way as quality newspapers may apply a "public interest" test to doubtful images, the degree to which an image meets our educational project scope may also be considered. When in doubt, there is no requirement for Commons to host any image of a person.

Identificació

The degree to which a subject is identifiable varies. An image that includes a clear view of the face is highly identifiable. Other features of the person's body, clothing or the location may help with identifying the subject. Outside of the image, clues may be obtained from the image title, description, origin, source url, and meta-data including but not limited to the geolocation and date. The greater the privacy issue with an image, the more weight should be given to the risk of identification by non-obvious means. Whether the person is the clear subject of the photograph or a mere bystander or background detail is another important factor.

The risk of identification can be minimised by not including certain information in the image description. However some details regarding the origin of the image (such as source url and author) may be a requirement of the source image licence or Commons policy, so cannot be removed. It may also be possible to shoot the subject from a different angle or frame it differently.

It is better to obtain consent than to attempt to anonymise an image that may require it. Placing a black band over the eyes was historically used to hide patient identity in medical publications but is no longer considered effective.[7] Pixelated features can sometimes be revealed by squinting one's eyes. Certain seemingly irreversible visual alterations such as applying a "twirl" effect over a subject's face may in fact be reversible.[8] These crude attempts to anonymise images may damage the value of an image to Commons to such a degree that it has limited or no realistic chance of being used.

Where the law forbids taking or publishing a photograph of a person without consent, and consent has not been given, then making the subject hard to identify (such as blurring their face) is unethical: the photograph should not be uploaded to Commons.

If the original or similar images are already present on the Internet (either on Commons or elsewhere) then attempts at anonymising the subject are ultimately futile. Content-based image retrieval engines such as TinEye or Google Images can identify a subject that has been anonymised. All of the following people are readily identifiable by anyone familiar with the subject. They may also be identified by computer, by simply dragging and dropping the image onto Google Images and searching for similar images.[9]

Exemples

No consent was required for this photograph, because it was taken in a public place

The following examples do not require consent in many countries:

  • An anonymous street performer
  • An anonymous person, in a public place, especially as part of a larger crowd
  • People taking part in a public event at a privately-owned venue, for example, a press conference at an office building
  • A basketball player competing in a match which is open to the public

The following examples typically require consent

  • A man and woman talking, entitled "A prostitute speaks to her pimp" (possible defamation)
  • An identifiable child, entitled "An obese girl" (potentially derogatory or demeaning)
  • Partygoers at a private party, unless press is specifically invited (unreasonable intrusion)
  • Nudes, underwear or swimsuit shots, unless obviously taken in a public place – even if the subject's face is obscured (unreasonable intrusion)
  • Long-lens images, taken from afar, of an individual in a private place (unreasonable intrusion)

Sol·licituds de supressió

The subject, photographer, or uploader of an image may request that it be removed from Commons. The reasons for removal may include such things as "It causes embarrassment" or "It was published without my consent", etc. Generally, images are not removed simply because the subject does not like them, but administrators are normally sympathetic to removal requests if good reasons can be given. In any case you may address a removal request through the normal public review process of a deletion request. If discretion is required, a deletion request explaining this may also be sent privately through Commons:Contact us/Problems.

Altres fonts d’imatges

Photographs with free licences that are hosted on other websites (such as Flickr) are often uploaded to Commons by users other than the photographer. This can make it difficult to ascertain whether consent was given. A free image licence only covers the photographer's rights and says nothing about the subject. It may be necessary to contact the owner of the photographs regarding permission from the subject, even though the licence means we do not need the photographer's permission.

Vegeu també

Enllaços externs

The following websites discuss the rights of photographers taking photographs in public places:

References