is it legal for someone to take photos of me and my kids in a public area without my knowledge?
539356
not without your permission. you can request the photos be removed and if they wont do this, make a formal complaint to the police. In some countries its illegal for PARENTS to photograph their own children in public let alone anyone else (because of child pornography fears....go figure!)
538813
I don't know...hmmm, let's see...well, this is just a hunch, but maybe it's because they want privacy! Would you like paparrazi taking pictures of your newborn baby?
911259
If you are in a public place, then it's fair game.\nEspecially if the club has posted anywhere a disclaimer ... but even if not ... I don't think it is illegal.\nConsult an attorney if you want to know absolutely for sure.  (Many will give you this info for free, or a minimum amount, or consult the city attorney).\n\nAs a photographer myself, I often take photo's of people in public places, and while I usually try to take non-identifying angles, sometimes the people in them can be identified.  I don't use such photo's for commercial purposes (i.e. sell the photo), but I do use them in my portfolio, my website, and have entered them in contests.  When I can, I get a waiver signed by the person, but most of the time in the situations, that is not possible.  Most magazines and other places won't publish or purchase a photo without a waiver ... but beyond that ... they are often not used.  This is a bit of a gray area.
425718
Uhhh who cares?  Did you start a child porn ring during you trip and have them take pictures? Then you might want to be a little worried.
304141
What do you mean by "public"?  If you are using a picture you've taken, you own the picture.  However, if you are using a picture off of a website, or a database like Corbis or Gettyone.com make sure the images are "royalty-free."  If not, the artist can sue you for using their work illegally.
493419
As far as I'm aware, there's no law on the books in the United States for that kind of thing.. the only picture issues you might have are generally copywrite infringment
423522
I can't think of a single reason they shouldn't be allowed. It's a public place, and cameras are freely allowed in public places. Further, there is a reasonable expectation that the school would be able to prevent crimes lke vandalism, etc.
288320
There is no law against taking pictures of another person.\nSelling pictures is also leagal if the person does not have thier likeness under copy protection.
429421
If the cameras or microphones are on public prop. there is nothing you can do about it.  If they were in your house that is trespassing.  Your lawyer should be helpful.  I assume he's taking this case on a contingency.  The better job the insurance investigators do, the less money he will likely make.  Perhaps you should find a new one.
1109187
You are allowed to take photographs in a public place.  \n\nUnder the law it is called an EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY.\n\nThere is no expectation of privacy in a public mall, however, the owners of the mall have a right to refuse letting you take photos there because the mall is private property.  You are on their property, even though it is open to the public.\n\nIf you were in a public park or  on a sidewalk, there is no expectation of privacy and you could take photos of anything you wanted, but anyone who can be identified in a photo would have to sign a release granting you permission to use the photo if you were going to make money from it.  However, if you are on a public sidewalk, you could not take photos of someone through their window.  You could however take photos of someone in their back yard if you were standing on the sidewalk.  There are many good books on this subject and if you are interested in photography you should check some books out of the library to find out what your legal rights are under various situations.
14220
Contact the ISP where the pictures are being hosted, and inform them that they have been posted without permission. This is usually enough to get their account yanked. Make it clear to them that if the images are made publically available ever again, every possible legal option will be persued. Make sure you keep the moral high ground at all times, so if this ever goes near court, it is an open and shut case which they will lose.
800282
No it is not legal, and its trespassing.\n\nSo, you are in for a heafty battle. There are privacy rights, and your land lord can be liable if he is in on it.\n\nGood luck. DO you have hard evidence of this? you will need concrete. LIke pictures... Make sure you have them..
25267
Sorry, in a public place you do not have an expectation of privacy, though you can probably get the paper to print a clarification and apology so that it becomes public record that you were not getting busted for something.
1107538
Dear Joe\n\nIn answer to your qustion, there are different aspect's with regards to the law of taking photographs in public places.\n\n1st.....Although such places as Courts, the Houses of Parliament etc are classed as public buildings with public access to them, it is quit legal to photograph the exterior of these building's, but it is illegal and prohibited from photographing any part of the interior for security reasons.\n\n2nd.....Banks & Building Societies have a complete restriction on there premises being photographed either on the inside or the outside of there buildings for security reasons.\n\n3rd.....With regards to the photographing of any building, whether it as public access or not, you should in the first instance seek the consent of the occupier or owner first before taking any photographs.\n\n4th.....With regards to your question regarding statues, first of all statues are created by Sculptor's, whereas Artist's paint picture's. If you merely want to photograph a statue for example in a public park and do nothing more than that with your photographs, then you will not Breach the Copy Right's Regulation's and therefore there is no grounds for the Sculptor to bring a Copy Right's Action, because in law the only thing you have done is to take a photographic image of a solid creation.\n\nHowever, if you take the photographic image of a statue in it's solid creation form and then deside to use that photograph for the purpose of re-creating that statue in either wood, clay, timber, cement, concreate, paper, cardboard, plastic etc, then you will breach the Copy Right's Regulation's and the Sculptor will have a legal right of action against you under the Copy Right's Act.\n\nI therefore trust that this answer's your legal question.\n\nRegards\n\nMR STEVEN NEWBERT JP\nHER MAJESTY THE QUEEN'S\nJUSTICE OF THE PEACE\nfor\nENGLAND & WALES
1040168
Put it this way, if you did not release your image to be published by anyone, you can sue them.  If you ever DID sign a release to a photographer, it may be then that you released the image to whomever the photog wanted to sell it to.  The rare exception would be in a fair use situation, such as a street scene publised in conjunction with a newspaper story.
933801
Well, it's not as if the media is filming you in your home, is it?  If you are in a public place, you are exposed to public recordings.  If I were you, I would worry MUCH more about the dozens of times per day you are recorded on CCTV rather than the random and infrequent act of being caught by a BBC camera crew...
655439
I built a website for a company, and I was restricted from using certain photographs from other companies/websites, unless I got permission from those companies directly.\n\nSome companies put a section on their website that shows pictures that they allow ANYBODY to use on their personal website.\n\nI would be careful with this.  If you really want to use a certain picture, ask the company or person that owns the website.  All they can do is say yes or no.\n\nIf you don't get permission, you can get slammed with a lawsuit for using a company name or website content, without permission.  Be careful!