Have Canadian forum members had legal problems after they showed street photographs o

[Big Ursus]

I previously posted a similar question, but it probably wasn't entirely clear and it, most likely, was not in the most appropriate thread. So here we go again.

I take many street pictures. None of them are salacious, I believe, and all of them were taken in public places. They show recognisable individuals whom I have not spoken to. Most are taken in Canada, where I live.

So here are my questions: can I legally show these Canadian photographs on the Web? Can I include them, without model releases, in a book, or an e-book? Can I show them in galleries?


I've checked the Web, but the answers were mostly about other countries. The few answers I found about Canada were rather vague. That's why I'm asking for your experiences. In other words, is a lawyer the only solution?

I look forward to hearing from you.
All the best,
Big Ursus

 

[Doug]

A lawyer could give you a credible decisive answer.

 

[Big Ursus]

Thanks, Doug, but I know there are Canadians who are forum members, and I'm hoping for some indications of their experiences in this area.

 

[jky]

From my very limited knowledge - yes on all accounts.
A good friend of mine has exhibited his street photographs taken in his city of Vancouver. He has also self published a book and several of his images are on his website and other hosting sites.

Locally here in Calgary, a couple friends have exhibited images as well.

None of the above had model releases and from my reading did not require it for their purposes - mainly editorial and documentary projects.

 

[codester80]

As long as the photographs are not used to sell something directly (commerical use) you are within your rights. However, that doesn't protect you against possible lawsuits from subjects in the photographs. If someone was upset about appearing in a gallery showing they have the option to sue. How successful their lawsuit would be is another matter. The law generally sides with the photographer over photos taking in public spaces and used for non-commercial uses.
I personally have no hesitation of showing photographs of people taken in public in galleries, books, etc.

 

[Andy Kibber]

Bear in mind that the law is very different in Quebec than the rest of Canada.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

... The few answers I found about Canada were rather vague. That's why I'm asking for your experiences. In other words, is a lawyer the only solution?

I look forward to hearing from you.
All the best,
Big Ursus

Where is one law you have to obey:

Criminal Code of Canada, 162. (1): (“Criminal Voyeurism”)
Every one commits an offence who, surreptitiously, observes – including by mechanical or electronic means – or makes a visual recording of a person who is in circumstances that give rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy.

But I'm not aware of any big lawsuit on this matter.

Lately one lady complained on Google Maps photograph. She was on the street photo and some parts of her were overexposed.
https://gigaom.com/2014/10/29/googl...2250-for-showing-her-cleavage-in-street-view/

Menzoid was attacked at Dundas square for taking person picture in public, but police didn't do anything. Perhaps, they knew who Menzoid is 🙂

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ing-picture--police-refuse-press-charges.html


This site is very helpful to learn about photography rules in Canada:
http://ambientlight.ca/laws/

Bear in mind that the law is very different in Quebec than the rest of Canada.

I'm not aware of any significant differences on provincial level.

http://www.francisvachon.com/blog/le-droit-a-l’image-au-quebec/

In Montreal they have something like: You can't take person picture without permission and try to sell it to this person.

 

[back alley]

keep searching the web…there is a great document that ells all you need to know…i think i have it bookmarked somewhere and can check later.
as far as i know if you are on public property you can take just about any image you want to and later on exhibit it as 'art' or non commercial work…as in it is not being used to sell a product.

 

[Lauffray]

In Montreal they have something like: You can't take person picture without permission and try to sell it to this person.

Actually it's a province wide jurisprudence afaik, it's about "right to personal image" which doesn't apply elsewhere in Canada. It's a little vague but from what I understand it means even if the photograph was taken in a public place the person can still sue if they feel you're presenting them in a negative light or harming their reputation in some way.

More generally though, I think displaying photographs is fine as long as you don't try to profit from them

 

[Scapevision]

Anywhere other than Quebec it is completely ok to photograph or videotape people in public space, as long as you stay away from kids 🙂 in fact many playgrounds have a sign that you can only be there with a child.

I have been doing a lot of shooting, even into windows out in the streets of Toronto, some NYC too. I have only once came across someone who wasn't aware of the law and got in my face. Legally, you are allowed to photograph and show anyone in public space, as long as it is not to promote or sell product or service. This means art shows, selling prints is fine. Slapping an ad text on the person's picture is not ok. For this you need a release.

Keep shooting.

 

[Lauffray]

as far as i know if you are on public property you can take just about any image you want to and later on exhibit it as 'art' or non commercial work…as in it is not being used to sell a product.

What if you're not selling a product or engaging in commerce, but you make a small profit off a print sale for example ?

 

[borret]

Kostya, thanks for the very useful information. I presume posting photos on Flickr and similar websites is equivalent to showing them in a gallery or publishing them in a magazine or book.

 

[back alley]

What if you're not selling a product or engaging in commerce, but you make a small profit off a print sale for example ?

print sales are fine.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Kostya, thanks for the very useful information. I presume posting photos on Flickr and similar websites is equivalent to showing them in a gallery or publishing them in a magazine or book.

At your service!
I'm not sure about web part. I work in broadcast industry and webcasting is not regulated as broadcasting. It is more "wild". Perhaps, photography is in same situation with less regulatory on the web.

 

[SuperUJ]

Anywhere other than Quebec it is completely ok to photograph or videotape people in public space, as long as you stay away from kids 🙂

Really? There is a law specifically say that children (that the photographer doesn't know) in public space cannot be photographed? I'm asking as I live in New York and my brother lives in Montreal. I go there often and I like street photography.

John

 

[Lauffray]

Really? There is a law specifically say that children (that the photographer doesn't know) in public space cannot be photographed? I'm asking as I live in New York and my brother lives in Montreal. I go there often and I like street photography.

John

No that's just people being too sensitive. I'm not aware of any laws specific to children and photography.

 

[Colin Corneau]

Quebec has the civil code for its provincial law - it's more restrictive on photography in public places.

The rest of Canada operates on the principle that you have no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public space, or a place visible from a public space.

Street photography, the increasingly-paranoid and prissy attitudes of the public at large notwithstanding, is fine to both practice and exhibit.
As others have noted, if you attempt to sell the prints commercially you then need a model release...however editorial and artistic use is fine. As it should be.

I've been running my street photography blog for about 7 years now so I think it's all good 🙂

 

[Lauffray]

Quebec has the civil code for its provincial law - it's more restrictive on photography in public places.

Not quite correct, the restrictions are on what use you make of them. Public space is public space. However people's perception here in Montreal is that you should ask before shooting, a courtesy but certainly not a legal requirement.

I've been running my street photography blog for about 7 years now so I think it's all good 🙂

Just because someone hasn't spotted their face there yet and decided it's not ok with them doesn't mean you're technically on the legal side (which you are)

 

[newsgrunt]

Toronto specifically, is very sensitive to children and photographers and it goes back to a missing kid case.

Allison Parrott was lured away by someone claiming to be a photographer and they were going to meet at the athletic field of a university in downtownish Toronto. Police found her body a few days later.

As a photojournalist, it was a very difficult time being a photographer around children as parents and others would lock their eyes on anyone within spitting distance of playgrounds or kids, and who had cameras. Lanyards with police/news media identification became the norm.

It's gotten better since but still have to be cognisant of history when around children in public.

 

[SuperUJ]

Following this logic of these parents ... If there was a missing kid that was last seen talking to an adult in a subway at night, we should not take subway after certain hours. Or we should not offer help to a seemingly lost kid inside a subway station.

I also don't follow the logic for comments like this, "street photographs in public space for commercial use require model release." If a magazine would like to buy a street photograph that I took five years ago. I have to identify the people in the image and get model releases from each of them?

John