https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_...
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_...
Actually I was surprised to learn that in the US you can not only take a photo of another person without their consent, but also publish it.
The “line” in the US is more of a complex curve, and commercial use or not is insufficient to make a conclusion either way (for just one common example of conmercial use without subject permission that is allowed, consider journalistic use.)
When Croatia was scheduled to join EU in July 2013., in the run up to that date its government gave out fat subsidies to anyone who converted their land into a wineyard, because once they joined the EU, game over.
a) was introduced in 1725, and carried into the EU at the time of EU formation.
b) was repealed in 2008
c) while it's true france has lobbied to re-introduce the law since then, they have failed so far.
In the former, I'm storing it in analog form in my mind. In the latter, I'm storing it in digital form on silicon.
If you really don't want to be seen, then don't go in public?
Does your GF mind if you record her in bed without her consent?
Explain her your photons bouncing BS or tell her that if she doesn't want to be recorded she shouldn't undress with someone else in the same room.
If you don't want strangers to see you, don't go out in public.
Yes, of course. That is why I have no right to tell you that you can't photograph what you can see in the public space. You have just as much right to use it as I do.
> The public space is not a free zone to abuse other people.
Taking a photograph of someone in a public space is not "abuse".
I believe in privacy. If I'm in my home, a bathroom, a private club or the like then you should not be subject to intrusion or recording without your permission. But I don't have the right to ask someone not to look at me when I am outside on the street and to me it seems weird that anyone would have a problem with that.