Photo someone at friends apartment and post in lobby

Question

Can a landlord photograph a visitor on the property without their permission or knowledge and post public on the property?

Answer 1

germany

No

They do not have the right to publish a photo of another person without their consent in general:

Gesetz betreffend das Urheberrecht an Werken der bildenden Künste und der Photographie

§ 22

Bildnisse dürfen nur mit Einwilligung des Abgebildeten verbreitet oder öffentlich zur Schau gestellt werden. Die Einwilligung gilt im Zweifel als erteilt, wenn der Abgebildete dafür, daß er sich abbilden ließ, eine Entlohnung erhielt. [...]

Translated:

Act on copyright in works of fine art and photography

§ 22

Pictures may only be distributed or publicly displayed with the consent of the person depicted. In case of doubt, consent shall be deemed to have been given if the person depicted received remuneration for having his or her likeness taken. [...]

And it gets even worse in this specific case. This was "You don't have permission to publish this picture". Basically, they could sue for a personality right violation under German copyright law.

Doing this to someone while they are in a protected space, like a home (not even their home, a home) might even be a criminal act:

Strafgesetzbuch (StGB)

§ 201a Verletzung des höchstpersönlichen Lebensbereichs und von Persönlichkeitsrechten durch Bildaufnahmen

(1) Mit Freiheitsstrafe bis zu zwei Jahren oder mit Geldstrafe wird bestraft, wer

1.

von einer anderen Person, die sich in einer Wohnung oder einem gegen Einblick besonders geschützten Raum befindet, unbefugt eine Bildaufnahme herstellt oder überträgt und dadurch den höchstpersönlichen Lebensbereich der abgebildeten Person verletzt

Translated:

German Criminal Code (StGB)

§ 201a Violation of the highly personal sphere of life and of personal rights through image recordings

(1) A custodial sentence not exceeding two years or a monetary penalty shall be imposed on any person who

1.

makes or transmits an unauthorized image recording of another person who is in a dwelling or in a room specially protected from view, thereby violating the highly personal sphere of life of the person depicted

Now you could argue that someone waving from a public facing balcony had no expectation of being specially protected from view, just because technically the balcony is part of the apartment. However, someone secretly taking pictures of a scene that the participants think is highly protected privacy, such as peeping through a window or in a bathroom, is exactly what this was made for.

Answer 2

Anyone can photograph anyone and do anything with the photo

australia

See How do laws affect photography of non-humans in public when people may be in the frame?

Let's put to bed the myth of privacy that is at the heart of your question: in R v Sotheren (2001) NSWSC 204 Justice Dowd said “A person, in our society, does not have a right not to be photographed.”

There are limitations mainly related to voyeurism and commercial use, which are discussed at http://www.4020.net.

So, if the photograph was not taken in a way that was illegal (as a result of trespass or is voyeuristic), the photographer (who owns the copyright) can allow it to be used in any way they wish.

A landlord who took a photograph within a private area would be violating the law (including all parts of a single-dwelling landholding). But, if the photo were taken in a communally accessible area, this would be fine.