Anyone have any experience shooting video of people in public without permission? I see paparazzi's getting footage of celebs all the time. From talking to paparazzi's I gather that as long as they are standing on public property (ex- the sidewalk) they cannot be sued. But can you shoot ANYONE on the street, no matter how unflattering (example - some chick drunk off her ass and acting stupid)? Any liability at all? I have a clip that I have been offered $$ to license for broadcast on a TV show that features reality clips.
Shooting people in public in California
- Thread starter Blade_Jones
- Start date
You are legally entitled to photograph or otherwise record people in places where they do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy, which basically translates to public places. You may publish the photos/videos as you please.
The unwitting subject, however, also has the right to file suit against you for anything they may perceive as slanderous. If the woman was drunk in public, she doesn't have a case - no matter how embarrassing - because the context was entirely of her own making. If, however, you shot footage of an obese person and used the video in the context of making fun of overweight people, you might open yourself up to legal action on that basis.
(I am no expert by any means, but that's my understanding of current privacy law.)
p.s. -- If you sell your footage to a broadcaster, they will very likely blur out faces just as a precaution if they do not have a signed release form from the subject, even though legally they don't have to. Less expensive than going to court.
The unwitting subject, however, also has the right to file suit against you for anything they may perceive as slanderous. If the woman was drunk in public, she doesn't have a case - no matter how embarrassing - because the context was entirely of her own making. If, however, you shot footage of an obese person and used the video in the context of making fun of overweight people, you might open yourself up to legal action on that basis.
(I am no expert by any means, but that's my understanding of current privacy law.)
p.s. -- If you sell your footage to a broadcaster, they will very likely blur out faces just as a precaution if they do not have a signed release form from the subject, even though legally they don't have to. Less expensive than going to court.
Last edited:
Hummm. This chick was drunk and/or high and she got arrested. This TV show will probably poke fun at this girl.
Again, if both of you were on public property she hasn't got a case. If the TV show airs the unexpurgated footage and she decides to take action, she would most likely go after the show since they probably have more money. Not much chance she'd win, but her lawyer might try for a settlement in lieu of court costs. If this TV show does this kind of thing a lot then they'll already have all their bases covered.
You want to shoot people in public? I dunno, it might be legal in California by now. Still, someone might get a little offended and call the cops. Thats OK though, they don't have the death penalty. They should only give you about... is it 25 years for murder in California?
My previous post is what is known as a "joke". Jokes are used regularly in daily conversation, and are usually responded to in one of several ways. You can:
a) Laugh
b) Think its a bad joke, but laugh anyways to be nice
c) Not laugh at all
d) Insult the joke teller because of the bad joke
e) Tell a joke of your own
f) Say: "Thats racist" and report the incident to the Equal Opportunity and Discrimination Board
Please note that you answered with none of the above reactions. The joke-teller was fully aware of the question and its meaning, and therefore does not need to be corrected. Rolling your eyes is also not an appropriate response, so please hang up, and try again.
I wrote "shooting VIDEO of people in public" because I anticipated someone might offer us the remnants of a "joke" as rudimentary and ancient as "What's black and white and red all over?"
Please stand by. An operator will be with you shortly. In the meantime, please take this short survey:
Is it physically possible for you to laugh?
Have you ever laughed before?
Have you ever told a joke before?
If you answered "No" to any of these questions, please hang up, and drink a gallon of bleach.
yes, i did. it was a good video. couldnt find many comments on the law but i assume if the guy actually said you do not have permission to film me then you cant keep on filming can you? becasue just like filming fat people it was to make fun of him for being a headcase
Of course you can keep shooting...as long as he's in a public place. Don't you think celebrities would like to be able to say, "Stop photographing me," and have it legally binding? How about criminals on their way to/from trial? People can say anything they please. Doesn't change the law.
My computer wouldn't play the video, for whatever reason, so I can't comment on it. However, just filming a "headcase" isn't any less legal than anyone else. It's the context in which it's published/broadcast. If you just show the guy behaving as he behaved that day then there's no issue. If you add a voice-over making disparaging remarks about him he may have a slander case.
I think you may be misunderstanding the fact that these are two completely different legal issues. The freedom to photograph people in public is entirely separate from an allegation of slander. Photography is the act itself, slander is the context in which the material is used.