Do you need someone's permission to take their picture if it is for personal use only?

Question

Paparazzi take pictures that I would assume are without the subject's approval. Private Investigators can also do the same when they are tracking a subject. I understand that taking it on private property is probably more of an issue, but if someone is out in the open on public land, is it legal or can you get into a world of trouble? Please provide sources/examples for answers, not just speculations.

Answer 1

If the location of the photo is a public place, you can take their photo without legal penalty. That doesn't mean you won't have civil charges of harassment or stalking. But that's another issue.

If the location is not public, or there is an expectation of privacy (such as a private office) then they have grounds to sue you for a civil tort and depending on the nature of the violation, a federal or state crime.

My source is 35 years of legal practice.

Answer 2

I don't think so but if you plan on using the picture publicly for monetary gain than yes. Most of the time celebrities are not aware of pictures taken of them by paparrazi which is why there is so much drama surrounding this issue. I think there is no legal issue (unless something is published that is damaging to the person) is because celebrities are in the public eye by choivce and paparrazi just comes along with the territory. But if you take a picture of someone you have to have their permission to use it publicly, though.

Answer 3

I agree with heleleibe.

However, if you want to use the picture commercially, like in advertising, you must get permission and pay them for the use of their likeness.