Stock editorial photography in place with stringent privacy laws

[meanderingemu]

how much do you worry taking picture for editorial stock where people are identifiable, though not the subject, in environment where the laws are strongly against the photographers.  I'm currently in Quebec visiting family where jurisprudence is that picture of people is invasion of privacy, and this is probably the first time i'm in such environment since focusing on taking pictures . 

 

Whereas i didn't even think twice about an image like this in the UK, do you worry elsewhere?

 

 

 

Edited December 20, 2019 by meanderingemu

[Robert M Estall]

As ever, I think the answer is: Don't make a production out of your photography. The only times I got any grief were when I was using a big lens on a pro-looking camera. You were visiting Montreal and as far as I can see, you are not a resident of Canada. I very much think you were not committing any offence, and for certain no sane Canadian is going to pursue you overseas. Just don't claim you have any release and you should be OK

 

The one area where you are very likely to get grief is shooting near a professional film location. The production company will have made a deal and paid a fee to the land-owner involving some exclusion and hired a few goons with security badges who will wing it to prevent any outside photography. Proclaiming you know your rights is unlikely to take you far!

[spacecadet]

Well, Germany has a right of personality law, but it doesn't stop my images of Germans in Germany being licensed....by German publications. As always, the David Kilpatrick principle applies: if no-one can lawfully prevent you from getting the image, it's yours. Also, if asked, and a reply can't be avoided, you're a tourist. Which is the truth, if not necessarily the whole truth.