photo on the internet

[Плотников Юрий Михайлович]

Thank!

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Regarding the police, I’ll say so, we have no problem with accepting a statement about something ... The police accept any statements ... If somewhere is not right, then there’s a mess and a mess in the system))) Regarding filming and posting information on the Internet, people often seek advice in connection with the fact that certain not quite normal people "roam" around the city, who shoot everything that they don’t get and put it all on the Internet ... In the description in this the topic of the situation is advice in order that the person who is being filmed could take certain measures and consolidate certain evidence that he may need when applying to the court to protect his rights (in the case of publishing a video photo with his image) ... this, no one talks about some clearly not legal methods ... On the detention of the person who takes the picture-speech in this article and is not conducted ... It's about retention))) After all, you can also hold it in different ways)))). ..If anyone comes in handy, I'll be glad ... Everything is from practice and ... Nothing far-fetched))))) In addition to everything else, it’s the topic in this topic that this situation is when faces are clearly removed by unfamiliar faces ... And not as Robert said))))) First, they shoot each other, and then to the court)))) Read carefully)))) And still, I would look at Robert or someone else, if they were in a situation where someone would take them on the street , and then posted this shoot with some not-so-decent comments on the Internet ...: lol: I think it would not be nice to read some stupid things about yourself At the same time, I feel my weakness in terms of the fact that you cannot nothing to do, because there is insufficient evidence that someone clearly illegally took someone and then also illegally placed this survey for general reference ....

 

[Роберт]

: D: D: D I just introduced you to Nevsky Prospect, bragging about the unfortunate Germans,: D Japanese and Chinese shouting: -Police !!!! : D The police, indeed, would come very quickly, would take you to the river Pryazhka or to Grandmother. There we have psychiatrists sitting. Well, then you would be smeared up to 10 days in court. And the lawyer would spread his arms and said: D: -You see, my dear, that's when they will post your photo on the Internet, then sue. And now I can’t do anything. : D

 

[Роберт]

By the way, this is in the best case, for the so-called retention, it is possible to get a criminal case, or it can just be up to 15 days if the victim does not have a lawyer. : D

 

[Андрей Захаров]

All that you always exaggerate Robert: lol: Read the Laws - the actions I propose are not illegal, including withholding ... (although who can understand this term - although in this context it’s only actions not violating the law) .A regarding contacting the police, see order No. 333 .... If it doesn’t work for you, sincerely press ... Put this question to the representatives of the Internal Affairs Directorate: o

 

[Роберт]

What is there to exaggerate. In St. Petersburg, it will be so! : D

 

[BEOWULF. Москва.]

Like many other laws (for example, the Law "On Private Detective and Security Activities in the Russian Federation"), this text on "Protecting the Image of a Citizen" has been extremely stupid and inconsistent.
Any enforcement power of Article 152.1.
(The publication of the photograph ... is allowed only with the consent of this citizen)
swung leveled by such a clumsy exception:
Such consent is not required in cases when:
1) the use of the image is carried out in state, public or other public interests;

It sounds especially touching “or other public interests” We have an audience whose interests are in no way consistent with the protection of privacy, dignity, and even the observance of constitutional human rights. Nidists, for example. they can form a public of any size in some place, and if it’s in their interests to suddenly show the whole world someone’s image in the bathhouse, then this citizen has no legal basis to seek protection in court. A nudist attorney can easily appeal to Article 152.1., They say, the images were used in the public interest.
By the way, not only in the internet, but mainly on television is the most massive exploitation of images of innocent citizens. Every day, on the main channels, we see dozens of people who are only suspected of committing a violation, they simply make a rating to the news. A drunk driver immediately gives a cool picture. So, he has the right to demand compensation for damage to his reputation, or purely monetary compensation for the use of his image in order to generate income. It is interesting that in Europe and the USA, laws work in such a way that even obvious maniacs and all kinds of prostitutes there flicker on the screen only as a blurry spot. I think in the future we will have many precedents when dissatisfied citizens will try to challenge the unauthorized use of their funny faces in order to increase the ratings of TV channels. With the brawlers Khabarov and Tretyakov it is clear that they will be judged and imprisoned. But some principal passenger, being acquitted by a court verdict, must file a lawsuit against those who filmed it in a compromising situation, and most importantly, against the legal. Persons - owners of the media. And claims should be in the amount proportional to the material gain.

 

[Детективное агентство Тула]

I agree with Dmitry.
In Russian law, they often try to combine "... a horse and a trembling doe."

 

[Андрей Захаров]

I certainly agree with Dmitry ... However, based on the realities of our lives, I’ll go to court with similar claims for an ordinary citizen — a rather troublesome business and, most importantly, costly ... Even if the claims are satisfied, I think the amount of compensation will be insignificant and will not be it can even cover the costs of the process .... What can you do is our realities ...

 

[Kuznecov.Igorj]

Hello and Happy New Year to all of you! I will describe a case that happened to me at a corporate party where everyone has known each other for a long time. I shot it on the phone, then all the photos were transferred to the organizer of the evening and anyone, if desired, could get a disk with all the photos that were taken for the whole evening from him. We have a law "On the protection of the data of an individual", but there is no image protection yet. So one madam screeched at me, why did I take it off. I did not pay attention to her, and the scandal grew and the present began to pay attention to us. It got to the point that this uneducated woman crawled at me with her fists and tried to grab the phone, although I had never specifically shot it. Crocodile she. Sideways hit the frame. And the evening was paid, everyone wished a certain amount, and practically every evening someone takes pictures. And this time it was just me. I had to take a microphone and explain that they don’t go to someone’s monastery with their charter. At evening, everyone knew each other, and this was Madame the first time. Of course, the explanations lasted at least 5-7 minutes, after which the scandal came to naught. It turned out that she was in a bad mood, she felt bad and so on. Part of the installment was returned to her and she was sent out of the club in peace. The others did not mind shooting. More this madam, let's call her Masha, I have not seen in the club. And so the question arises: should everyone take written permission from such parties? No and no again. I really hoped that there would be a process, I wanted to stick it in the shit with my nose, but nothing happened. Conclusion: people heard something and in every opportunity, wanting to show their erudition, I use half-hearted knowledge, not realizing that my behavior spoils everyone’s mood. And for covert shooting I have equipment, so no one will guess that I'm shooting someone.