This gets even more interesting when copyright is taken into account.
I've been searching for this link:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/women/story/0,3604,1063735,00.html
It reflects a minor movie star and the rights of the photographer, pre any
data privacy laws. The picture certainly identifies an individual (provided
one knows the film), and the copyright and ownership of the picture rests
with David Bailey, one time star of Olympus Camera adverts on TV!
Any consent that will have been given(?) will have been given by the actor's
parents, since he was 14/15 at the time.
Now, when was the last time you walked past a high street professional
photographer's shop? The window always contains displays of their work,
with their copyright. Do the individuals give permission? I wonder!
[snip]
To add my twopennyworth to the discussion, I think a photograph is personal
data in most circumstances that it is used in a public manner. Some people
(usually models) consent to their image being used in a public manner but
the majority of us do not. If a photograph was not capable of identifying
an individual, would model consent forms be needed at all?
Ian B
Ian Buckland
Managing Director
Keep IT Legal Ltd
[Snip]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|