Our library is taking part in the 365 Library Library Days project initiated by Michael Porter aka Libraryman. We will join other libraries in uploading 365 images of our library over the next year – more info at Michael’s blog . The most interesting photos have people doing exciting library activities.

It got me thinking: – should you ask for permission before you take/use a stranger’s photograph?

The unidentified children hunting Easter eggs in this photo have given me permission to use it

Do these things make a difference:

• If they are the main subject?
• Just an incidental bystander in the photo?
• If they can’t be clearly identified?
• A public figure?
• Private citizen?
• They have expressly told you they don’t want their photo taken?
• If you only use the image in your personal collection?
• If you post it on the net?
• If you add an offensive tag?
• If you are doing it on behalf of an organization?

People in these photos from Flickr would be on the “ask first” side:

• I Was Assaulted By This Man Who Identified Himself as a Police Officer and Refused to Provide Me Identification, Photography is Not a Crime (via Tame the Web )
• A Cigarette, Platform Shoes and a Finger

I think that this Taxi Driver probably wouldn’t mind. You can find more of these candid shots under the Raw Street Photography group or the steetphotography tag on Flickr.

For the 365 Library Days project, we are rewriting our release form and making sure we have the permission of people featured in the photo. The text is very simple. It includes the name and contact details, an “exceptions to agreed use” section where they can specify any conditions , and can be also used for release to use photos TAKEN by other people. The permission merely states that they agree that we can use it for “any University publication, on the internet and in displays”.

I know this is the right thing to do now, particularly for an organisation, even though people don’t have any ownership/copyright in their own image. I suspect that in five years or so, privacy and content creation will have been redefined further, so this will seem like an archaic “pissing in the wind” kind of exercise.