Public Photography Rights

It's the taking of the photos which is an intrusion, not the photos themselves.

Photographs taken in public... aren't private! If you don't want to be photographed in public places, don't go to public places.

"No person has the "right" to not be photographed in public." Maybe in your country, not mine.

No, you're twisting my words, or simply misinterpreting. The expectation in public is that random individuals have the right to photograph you.

If they can see me they can take my picture. It should be legal. Impolite perhaps but legal.If there's situation where I don't want to have my picture taken that's exactly the same situation where I don't want to be seen by anyone.

> If I walked up to several individuals (maybe even you) on the street with a camera and tried to take a close-up, a lot of them would object. I don't think "why not let me take it, it's already online someplace" would be a convincing reason to allow it.In many jurisdictions including where I live in, taking pictures at public places is allowed by law whether or not some other human happens to be in the frame of my picture. It is called "incidental inclusion".

I don't think the author was implying that taking one's picture without permission in a public space is illegal, merely that it's rude or weird. Which it often is.

This is very similar to how it works in most western countries.You can photograph people in public all you want, but you cannot publish those without their permission.Blurring or the people not being in focus/center can allow you to do so without getting everyone's permission though (think of crowds, passersby in the background).

With very constrained exceptions, in most jurisdictions of the United States, it's entirely legal to take a photograph of an individual in a public place and post it to the Internet without their permission.

Possibly ethics and law (personal rights to the photo)?