The intellectual property rights on photographs are protected in different jurisdictions by the laws governing copyright and moral rights. In some cases photography may be restricted by civil or criminal law. Publishing certain photographs can be restricted by privacy or other laws. Photography can be generally restricted in the interests of public morality and the protection of children. Reactions to photography differ between societies, and even where there are no official restrictions there may be objections to photographing people or places. Reactions may range from complaints to violence for photography which is not illegal.
The legality of recording by civilians refers to laws regarding the recording of other persons and property by civilians through the means of still photography , videography , and audio recording in various locations. In many places, it is common for the recording of public property, persons within the public domain, and of private property visible or audible from the public domain to be legal. However, laws have been passed restricting such activity in order to protect the privacy of others. To make matters even more complicated, the laws governing still photography may be vastly different from the laws governing any type of motion picture photography.
Opportunities for filmmakers. Film events in London. Artists' moving image.
This is part of the guideline Photographs of identifiable people. The following is a list of countries where consent is needed for one or more of the mentioned situations. It is generally OK to take photos of people in public without obtaining permission. Based on this view, the Queensland District Court found in Grosse v Purvis that a tort of invasion of privacy had been made out on the facts and awarded the plaintiff damages. However, this case concerned a long history of harassment over many years and has limited application.