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

  • Thread starter Thread starter aychamo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pictures
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the legal implications of sharing intimate photos, particularly focusing on copyright ownership, consent, and privacy laws. Participants explore various scenarios involving the sharing of such images, including the rights of the photographer and the subjects, as well as the moral considerations surrounding the use of these photos.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question who owns the copyright of intimate photos, suggesting it typically belongs to the photographer, but others argue that permission from the subjects is necessary for the copyright to be valid.
  • There is a discussion about privacy laws and whether they protect individuals, especially minors, in photographs taken without their consent.
  • One participant raises a hypothetical scenario about the legality of using intimate photos for blackmail, indicating a concern about ethical implications.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that if photos are taken in public places where there is little expectation of privacy, the subjects may have no legal rights over those images.
  • Participants express differing opinions on the morality of sharing intimate photos, emphasizing the need for clear consent from the subjects involved.
  • One participant notes that the legality may depend on whether the photos are sold or distributed for profit, suggesting that sharing them for free may have different legal implications.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding copyright ownership, consent, and the moral considerations of sharing intimate photos. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus reached on the legal and ethical implications.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include varying interpretations of privacy laws, the impact of consent on copyright ownership, and the unclear legal status of sharing photos without profit. The discussion does not resolve these complexities.

aychamo
Messages
375
Reaction score
0
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?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's all down to who owns the copyright, which I think is usually the photographer.
 
Surely the photographer can't hold the copyright of the picture without the permission of the photographed subjects?
 
Crumbles said:
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.
 
Crumbles said:
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.
 
Is that the case even if under 18s are subjects in the photographs? They always seem to blur out kids in newspapers and reports.
 
aychamo said:
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 :devil:. :biggrin:
 
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.
 
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.
 
  • #10
aychamo said:
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.
 
  • #11
Monique said:
I think you rather should be questioning the morality.

As soon as you find a universal authority on morality, let me know.
 
  • #12
Monique said:
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) :biggrin:
 
  • #13
Monique said:
I think you rather should be questioning the morality.

aychamo said:
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.
 
  • #14
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.
 
  • #15
Monique said:
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.
 
  • #16
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.