Why can not I publish children's photos on the Internet
A Life / / December 19, 2019
Look at this dormouse. The kid just woke up, pajamas with cars slightly ridden. He sweetly stretches in the warm little bed, rubs the sleep from his eyes. Mom and dad caught a beautiful moment of awakening camera lens ...
Or look at the "hooligan", showing the tongue.
Are not they lovely? Do you want to enjoy these little ones every day? Welcome! Why not? Just think - it's not your kids! What's the difference?! After all circles with their cute little face can be purchased at online store.
Journalist Dmitry Tokmetsis (Dimitri Tokmetzis) and designer Yuri Virman (Yuri Veerman) conducted a social experiment. They collected photos of kids on Flickr and launched odnostranichnik, which sells mugs with portraits of other people's children. Just $ 15-20, and you happen to have a glass with a sweet crumbs.
"Is that possible?" - you ask. As the privacy, protection of the rights of the child and other legal values enshrined in constitutions and international instruments?
The right to privacy is part of the basic human and civil rights. In Russia, it is enshrined in Articles 21-25 of the Constitution, the Federal Law № 152 "About the personal data», № 149 "On Information, Information technologies and information protection ", articles 152, 152.1, 152.2 of the Civil Code, Article 137 of the Criminal Code, as well as a number of international instruments: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Do business with photos other people's children does not violate human rights?
Violates.
Tokmetsis Virman and believe that their experiment violated the right to privacy in several aspects. Although the declared human rights in life are not always respected, their significance should not be underestimated.
The right to control information about themselves
Privacy consists of several competences. One of them - the right to control information about themselves. This means that a person has the right to decide for himself (as far as legally permissible), where and what data to place on yourself and your life. Based on this Tokmetsis Virman and did nothing improper. After all, people will post pictures on Flickr license Creative Commons with a resolution of the commercial use of the content.
Ethical problems occur because many do not know that CC licenses are different.
On this basis, at the end of last year, I broke the scandal surrounding the print service Flickr Wall Art. The company Yahoo (Flickr owner) in full compliance with the terms of the Creative Commons license that permits the use of photographs for commercial purposes, printed photo pictures, send them to clients and get paid for it fee. The authors of the photos at the same time did not receive a penny. The wave of indignation caused the service to remove the collection of Creative Commons photos from the collection of Flickr Wall Art and bring an official apology.
In some jurisdictions, the use of photographs depicting children need the permission of parents or legal guardians of minors. But that's a moot point. After all, laying out a photo Chain of children whose parents (representatives) have given tacit consent to their distribution.
Nothing prevents other sites from using your photo. If the picture has got to search Google Image, then soon she smashed the resource set. Tokmetsis Virman and we found that the downloaded photo of children were also on the websites of travel, on the Protection of Children, Mental Health.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Web giants earn millions on private data users. The driving force of the World Wide Web - user-generated content. Photos, videos, texts, music - people will upload and distribute it.
At that moment, when you click "Publish" to Facebook or YouTube, you enter into a tacit agreement with them, which allows to use freely this material, including commercially.
Take Facebook as an example. January 1, 2015 the social network has updated the user agreement. The social network announced what collects personal information about users:
- posts, correspondence, personal data during registration, photos and videos uploaded to the platform - all this Facebook stores and, if necessary, can be used for their own purposes;
- transaction Implemented through Facebook (e.g., Donato in Candy Crush Saga);
- user activities on third-party resources, if they clicked a button installed there "like» (Like) or "Share» (Share).
After sending Facebook notifications to update the user policy in the Russian press began ballyhoo. Due to the vagueness of the wording of the journalists decided that the social network will transmit (eg, analytical companies, carriers, etc.) personal data without the user's consent. But later the representatives of Facebook explained:
We do not share personal information that personally identifies a user, advertisers or partners in cases where you do not provide us with this special permission.
However, this does not mean that web-corporations do not make you. Go on Google Play, near many apps, books, games and movies you will see the avatars of your friends from your Google+ circles. When registering, they checked the box, and now Google can use these photos for marketing purposes, by promoting their application.
Thus, in agreement with the policy of the use of data of a particular resource, we actually give up the right to control information about themselves.
Right to privacy
Currently, the Russian legal field is no official definition of privacy. But it is understood that if a person has received access to information about the private life of another person, it may not, without permission to transfer them to third parties.
Are privacy breach collection, storage, dissemination and use of information in the state, public or other public interestsAs well as in cases where the information about the private life of a citizen earlier became public or was disclosed by a citizen or by his will.
A simple example: the clinic can not disclose information about a patient's illness without their consent. But if the diagnosis is requested law enforcement agencies in the interests of the investigation, the medical institution may call it. Also losing data confidentiality, if a person has publicly written about it, for example, on Twitter.
The Network confidentiality can be broken accidentally. Let's say you put a very strict privacy settings on social networks and think that now will see the publication of your intimate only the most-closest. This is not true. There is no guarantee that your family and friends as well scrupulously follow the privacy settings. "Class" or "Share" sent to a post on the wall of a friend, and she could see everything, sometimes even including non-registered users.
Users negligence does not end there. Moms send their children pictures to a photo contest, spread in communities of interest, and do not think that the rule of confidentiality in this case does not work.
context privacy
So, from a legal point of view of action and Tokmetsisa Virmana legal. But the authors of the experiment is still considered his action wrong. Why? The whole thing in context.
In English-speaking countries, there is such a thing as privacy. It is difficult to translate. Roughly speaking, it is the privacy that is something that is closely connected with the personality, informal relationships and interactions with loved ones.
More difficult to understand the legal nature of privacy. In the Russian legal field closest to the concept of privacy, speech about which mentioned above. But this is not the same thing. "Privacy" is also closely linked with the natural rights of man, but its borders are more difficult legal contours.
Thus, the director of the Institute for Information Law of the University of New York professor Helen Nissenbaum (Helen Nissenbaum) many years studying the issue of privacy and anonymity on the Internet. She believes that many users agreeing to provide information about themselves in public access, not even imagine what the intimate details can be extracted from it.
Professor Nissenbaum introduced the term "privacy context." According to her, digital field is gradually absorbed by the norms of ethics. For example, discuss with your doctor the health problems we mean that this information will remain private. It is natural in the context of privacy. But, if on the same subject we are talking to a sales representative of a pharmaceutical company, it is obvious that the information will be used for commercial purposes.
In both cases, the concept of information sharing context. No need to specify which of the cases related to privacy, and what is not.
The problems begin when the context is not the will of man. And it happens every time the button is pressed, "Share."
Parents who publish pictures of their children, are in the context of: show the children and grandparents, relatives and friends to share the joy. But when Tokmetsis Virman and struck shots on mugs and posted on a commercial platform, the context has shifted. Hence the discomfort - they invaded privacy.
In this sense social media - ram, invading the privacy zone and change the information context. Many have heard of situations where a harmless tweet begins to live his life and brings problems.
Facebook, Google, Instagram, and other large companies recite user privacy. But privacy context escapes. Willingness to share their lives online does not mean that everyone agrees with the forms of the use of private information.
It would be nice if the pop-up window when you press the button, card sharing "Waive the right to privacy?». Which button would you press "Yes" or "Not»?
P. S. Tokmetsis Virman and ask you to write them ([email protected]), if you find their online store a picture of their child. They immediately delete it. Currently it sold seven cups. The proceeds will go to charity.
(Via: 1, 2, 3)