Article 100 of the General Principles of Civil Law, "Citizens enjoy the right to portrait, without their consent, shall not use the portrait of citizens for profit." But China's law has the concept of portrait right, but not in the form of law to accurately define the connotation and extension of the right to portrait, its meaning in the law has no authoritative interpretation or provisions. What is portrait, according to the dictionary or expert opinion, such as Renmin University of China Professor Yang Lixin (doctoral tutor, China's civil code, one of the drafters of the personal torts part), portrait, portrait, "similar, like", "like" compared to the character made of the image also. Commonly known as "compared to the characters and made with the characters similar to the image" [1]; that is, through painting, photography, sculpture, video, film, television and other forms of art, so that the citizen's appearance in the material carriers reproduced on the visual image.

The right to portrait is a specific personality right of citizens. What is the right of portrait? The right to a portrait is a personality right of a citizen to the benefits embodied in his or her own portrait. Compared with other personality rights, the object of the right to portrait itself has a certain element of property interests, that is, the use of economic benefits, in the portrait of the personality interests, there are spiritual interests, but also the interests of property, especially the interests of property is very obvious. Generally speaking, a person who looks beautiful, there is the value of beauty, a person who looks ugly, there is the value of ugly, but looks not ugly and handsome in general, very few people ask him to advertise, here involves the problem of the aesthetic value of the portrait.

Rights, Latin "jus", refers to both rights and laws, including the meaning of justice [2]. Rights, also known as legal rights, is the state through the law, the subject of legal relations to make or not to make a certain behavior, and require others to make or not to make a certain behavior of permission and guarantee [3]. Sub-political rights, economic rights, social rights, etc., civil rights in accordance with the content of property as the standard, divided into property rights (divided into property rights and intellectual property rights) and personal rights, personal rights refers to its own inseparable and non-transferable civil rights without direct property content [4]. Personal rights to its object is personality interests or identity relations, divided into identity rights (based on a specific identity to enjoy, such as spousal rights, parental rights, guardianship, etc.) and personality rights. Personality right refers to the civil subject for the maintenance of independent personality necessary, to the personality interest as the object of the right, personality interest refers to the civil subject on its personal freedom and human dignity, life, health, name or name, reputation, privacy, portrait and other interests to enjoy the sum of the interests of the civil subject [5]. Portrait right belongs to one of the personality rights.

Portrait right is a natural person's personality mark, reflecting the natural person's appearance attributes, its basic content includes three: one for the production of the exclusive right, manifested in their own can be at any time through any form of production of portrait, others shall not interfere, also manifested in the right to prohibit others from illegally producing their own portrait; two for the use of the exclusive right, the right to prohibit others from illegally using their own portraits, here is also affiliated with the right to transfer the use of the portrait right. The right to use the portrait of the right to transfer; Third, the right to protect the interests, in addition to the right holder, anyone has the obligation not to infringe.

In the concept of portrait right, to remind you of a few points: 1, the legal person does not have the right to portrait, because the portrait reflects the natural person's physical attributes, although the language, such as "□□□□ organs of the glorious image of" the image of the legal person to describe; 2, the portrait in the right to portrait lies in the "like", that is only referring to the "like", that is only referring to the "like", that is only referring to the "like", that is only referring to the "like", that is only referring to the "like". ", that only refers to the face, the image of the five senses, "face". This is not accurate. Portrait of the image, not only refers to the "five senses", "face", but also refers to the natural person's appearance image in the material carrier reproduction, of course, mainly refers to the image of the human face, but can not be understood only as "face" or "five senses". "or" five senses ". When the image carried by a photograph is sufficient to recognize the reproduction of the image of the person, it should be recognized that the portrait is the portrait of the person. Of course, if you can not judge whose portrait, of course, can not be determined to infringe on whose portrait, held in hainan province, the first human body photography art tour, the printed tickets used a female model's photo, the photo is a model of a portrait, the title is called "beauty", the tickets used on the use of this photo will be above the lips of the character part of the cut off, triggering litigation, the focus of the dispute is, the unauthorized use of such a "no face". "No face" photo, is not constitute infringement of the right to portrait, all know and the plaintiff is more familiar with all that this photo is the plaintiff's face, this is the plaintiff should win the lawsuit. 3, the text describes, does not belong to the reproduction of portraits, such as so-and-so, sharp mouth and cheeks, a system of the nose is not always passable, smelly, a pair of beetle eyes flashing out annoying vision. This needs to be reprocessed through the brain, does not belong to the scope of the right to portrait, such as infringement of the right to use the right to honor infringement solution. 4, the building does not have the right to portrait, but according to the new Copyright Law, there is a work of authorship, a kind of work. 5, and the right to portrait is closely linked to the copyright, a thing with two rights, the right to portrait for the basic right, the right to copyright for the derivative rights.

Second, the composition of the infringement of the right of portrait and the exercise of the right of portrait

In the confirmation of the infringement of the right of portrait, according to the general principles of civil law, article 100, "without the consent of the person, shall not be for profit" use of the portrait of citizens, there are only two elements, the first condition in practice, sometimes too wide protection, it seems to be The first condition is sometimes too broadly protected in practice, and it seems that the consent of the person concerned is required at all times, so that the addition of an article does not "prevent the violation of the law". On the "blocking the illegal cause", it refers to the implementation of the principle of the law provides that the act may not be committed, but has a special provision of the law does not constitute a violation of the cause, so that the implementation of the act becomes lawful, and thus blocking the illegality of the act. Mainly include:

① public welfare: in order to maintain social needs, such as the advanced mission photo exhibition, uncivilized behavior and published criticism, wanted fugitives;

② my interests: the publication of the search for people;

③ journalism: news reports, the right to portrait submerged in the collection, queues, ceremonies, shall not be claimed the right to portrait, similarly, the collective photographs of the individual shall not be claimed the right to photo Portrait right;

④ For the purpose of documenting a specific public event, the use of the participant's portrait, participation is tantamount to a commitment to the right to be used.

On the contrary, the "for profit" element, but this view is sometimes too narrow to protect the legitimate rights and interests of citizens. For example, some people illegally use other people's likeness (such as: intentionally use a wide-angle lens to take a picture of the mouth "tusks" and wild boar like put together), and not for profit, the same constitutes a tort. So we can add "but with the exception of insulting use of portraits" this limitation. Summarize the practical elements of portrait infringement: without my consent, for the purpose of profit (except for insulting use), does not have a "blocking the illegal cause".

Three, infringement of portrait right loss of civil liability

Infringement of portrait right of civil liability, including stopping the infringement, eliminate the impact, apologize, compensation for damages. Losses of infringement of portrait right is generally moral damages, the judge will be relatively large. On how to determine the standard of compensation for moral damages, the supreme court "on the determination of civil infringement of moral damages liability for a number of issues of the interpretation of" article 10 "the amount of compensation for moral damages according to the following factors: (a) the degree of fault of the infringer, unless otherwise provided by law; (b) the infringement of the means, occasions, behavioral patterns and other specific circumstances; (c) infringement (c) the consequences of the infringement; (d) the profitability of the infringer; (e) the economic capacity of the infringer to assume responsibility; and (f) the average standard of living in the location of the court under appeal. Where there are clear provisions in laws and administrative regulations on disability compensation and death compensation, the provisions of the laws and administrative regulations shall apply". Mainly by the judge through the above factors to discretion, at the same time, should be differentiated principle and appropriate limitations principle. Different regions, different parties, different scope of influence, different nature of the case, it is difficult to use a standard to promote. I think we can grasp the standard of compensation from three aspects: (a) to the aggressor to play the role of punishment; (b) to the victim to have a soothing effect; (c) to the community to have an educational role. The amount of compensation that meets the above three requirements is correct. Each region can be based on the local economic situation, per capita income level to set appropriate limits, but in principle, the amount of moral damages should not be dead, to have the judge's discretion.

Example 1: Watson's search: Shanghai, a 19-year-old female college students in Shanghai Watson's Commodity Co., Ltd. a supermarket was searched after the indignation of the lawsuit. Shanghai Hongkou District People's Court recently ruled in the first instance that the defendant within ten days of the newspaper to the plaintiff Qian Yuan apologized, and compensation of 250,000 yuan of moral damage and other costs. July 8, 2001, the plaintiff Qian Yuan in the Watson's Sichuan North Road store when leaving the doorway alarms suddenly beeped. Despite the Plaintiff's objections, the Defendant forcibly took her into the office for a strip search, which turned out to be fruitless. The Plaintiff strongly protested and demanded an apology and compensation from the Defendant, to which the Defendant did not agree. The Plaintiff then filed a lawsuit against the Defendant, requesting the Defendant to apologize and pay compensation of 500,000 RMB for moral damages and other expenses. The first instance judgment awarded 250,000 RMB for moral damages. "Watson's" appeal, consumers did not produce evidence that they were forced to take off their pants, so the fact of infringement can not be recognized. Regrettably, in the absence of sufficient evidence from Watsons, the court of second instance blurred the details of "whether they were forced to take off their pants", which actually supported some of Watsons' claims. "In fact, it supported part of Watsons' claim and changed the judgment to 10,000 yuan. This also demonstrates the wide scope of the judge's discretion.

Example 2: people and dogs with meals: Shanghai Concession embassy and consulate area, after the Opium War, the Qing government corruption and incompetence, this area erected "Chinese and dogs are not allowed to enter" sign, according to the newspaper, the Jintai District Court of Baoji City, Shaanxi Province, the judgment of "people and dogs with meals" case, the plaintiff lost the case. The case was reportedly decided by the Jintai District Court in Baoji City, Shaanxi Province, in favor of the plaintiff. The facts of the case were: at noon on August 1, 1999, Wang Mou and his wife went to the Xiangyang Court Restaurant, which was owned by Baoji Xiangyang Catering Co. In the middle of the meal, there are two women with Jingba dog, on the table with the restaurant bought meals to feed the dog, using the restaurant's public tableware. Wang believed that his human dignity had been violated and sued the restaurant for 25,000 dollars in compensation under the Consumer Protection Law. Article 14 of the Consumer Law stipulates that "Consumers shall enjoy the right to respect for their human dignity, national customs and traditions in the purchase, use of goods and acceptance of services". In the case of "human and dog dining together", it is the issue of moral compensation for human dignity that is involved. Unfortunately, the court dismissed the plaintiff's lawsuit on the grounds that the restaurant did not intend to.

Four, some cases on portrait right

Case 1, Liu Jialing and Shantou Yaris Cosmetics

Shantou Yaris Industrial Company without the consent of Hong Kong movie star Liu Jialing, his portrait printed on the cosmetic bags, Liu Jialing in Shanghai, after the evidence, in Shanghai, sued Yaris company, demanded to stop the infringement of the law, compensation for apology, compensation for damages of one million yuan. . The case was settled by mediation for 100,000 yuan, most of which I'm told went to Project Hope.

Strictly speaking, in photographic activities, as long as one of the following circumstances, can be regarded as infringement of others' portrait rights.

I. The use of a portrait without the consent of the owner of the portrait without preventing the violation of the law.

The use of the portrait without the consent of the portrait right holder, also known as the "improper use of other people's portraits". China's civil law on the right to portrait of the legal provisions of the portrait is basically for the portrait of the "improper use" and the provisions. This improper use is differentiated into "for-profit" and "non-profit" illegal use. We can not think that as long as the purpose is not for profit, or although the portrait right owner's consent, can be non-profit arbitrary use of citizens' portraits, this understanding is one-sided. Article 100 of the General Principles of the Civil Law of China stipulates: "Citizens enjoy the right of portrait, without their consent, shall not use the portrait of citizens for profit." The supreme people's court "on the implementation of & lt; Chinese people's * * * and the general principles of civil law & gt; opinions on a number of issues (for trial implementation)," article 139, the infringement of such restrictions on: "for profit, without the consent of the citizens to use their likenesses to do advertisements, trademarks, decorative window displays, etc." scope. Article 120 states, "Citizens whose rights to name, portrait and reputation have been harmed shall have the right to demand the cessation of the infringement, the restoration of their reputation, the elimination of the influence, an apology, and compensation for damages."

In the case of using another person's portrait without his or her consent and not for profit, only acts with a blocking illegal cause are legal. This is the case for news reports and "wanted" notices issued by public security authorities to arrest suspects.

Portrait right and the right to name, has the exclusive right, for their own portrait of the possession, use and disposal, can only belong to the citizens themselves, without my consent, others may not enjoy. Violation of the right to portrait behavior, not in the use of citizen's portrait for the purpose of profit, but in the disrespect of the citizen's exclusive right to his portrait. Therefore, no matter what the purpose of the citizen's portrait to be copied, dissemination, exhibition, etc., should obtain the citizen's consent, otherwise it constitutes an infringement of the right to portrait.

Two, unauthorized production of other people's portraits (including the possession of other people's photos). Unauthorized creation and possession of another person's portrait (photo) without their consent. For photographers, it is the act of stealing another person's photograph.

Portrait is the external expression of a citizen's "personality", and only the person himself has the right to decide whether to reproduce his own image. As for the production (shooting) of portraits, whether it is for public publication, or for the purpose of private storage, does not affect the composition of the infringement of portrait rights. That is to say: even if the use of the public is not added, it also constitutes the same infringement, such as the photo studio privately printed customer photos to save.

Three, malicious insults, defacement of other people's portrait. That is, the wrongdoer maliciously insult, deface, defilement, destruction, etc., infringement of other people's portrait or damage to the integrity of other people's portraits. Including altering, distorting, burning, tearing or hanging upside down other people's photos, such behavior not only constitutes an infringement of the right to portrait, but also often constitute an infringement of the right to reputation.

Consolidating the above, in photographic practice, often constitutes a violation of the right of portrait, there are the following three cases:

In recent years, the so-called violation of the "right of portrait" of the report, seems to have more and more trend, why? I think there are a lot of reasons, but it may boil down to these three: First, the photographer does not know the law; Second, the photographer has a willful infringement of people's right to portrait with the intention of wanting to "profit; Third, the photographer does not understand the legal significance of the right to portrait, as long as they see their own portrait in the press on the lawsuit claims.

1, "for profit" must have two conditions: first, without my consent, and the use of other people's portraits; second is for profit behavior, violating other people's right to portrait, that is, the user in the subjective, hope that through the use of other people's portraits, to obtain economic benefits. However, the so-called "profit" is not our common understanding of the need to have a profit-making fact, as long as the subjective intention of profit-making, objective profit-making behavior, regardless of whether the perpetrator to achieve the purpose of profit-making, constitute "profit" fact.

2, in any form of infringement of the right to portrait (right of reputation, right of honor), the same legal responsibility: that is, the infringer has the right to require the infringer to stop the infringement, restore the reputation of the infringer to eliminate the impact of the apology, compensation for damages. Visible, without the permission of the portrait right holder, not for profit and the use of other people's portrait, such as the portrait right holder caused actual damage, such as to the portrait right holder caused by the mental damage, etc., the use of the same constitute infringement (portrait right) responsibility. In judicial practice, there are also many cases of defacement, ugliness and distortion of citizens' portraits without the purpose of profit.

The above can clearly show: whether "for profit", is not to determine whether there is infringement of citizens' portrait rights of the only prerequisite and elements, but only to determine the size of the infringement of the responsibility of the important circumstances.

3, although the portrait of the person agreed to use his portrait, but because the use of the person beyond the scope of the use of the portrait of the person permitted the use of the use of the area, the use of the time limit. This situation does not require the existence of the portrait of the actual damage caused by the person, constitute tort liability. Of course, this situation generally belongs to the contract of breach of contract.

The way of civil liability for infringement of portrait rights

China's infringement of portrait rights is mainly civil liability. The civil liability includes stopping the infringement, eliminating the influence, apologizing and compensating the loss. Among them, stop the infringement, eliminate the influence, apologize for the non-property liability mode, compensation for damages for property liability mode. In China's judicial practice, the determination of tort liability is generally: First, "for profit", is the purpose of profit as the standard of compensation. That is, regardless of whether the "seriousness of the situation", also regardless of whether the profit, as long as the purpose of illegal use is for profit, and the portrait right person request compensation, the infringer must bear the liability. Second, for non-profit infringement of portrait rights, that is, the infringement of portrait rights of moral interests in the determination of damages, the "circumstances are serious" as the basic standard. If the circumstances are minor and do not cause serious consequences, generally do not determine the material aspects of the compensation.

According to China's law and judicial practice (mainly the latter), based on a number of specific circumstances and social public **** interest reasons, can be without the consent of the portrait right holder, that is to say, reasonable use of his portrait:

Generally, without the consent of the portrait right holder shall not be used without authorization, but in some cases, although without the consent of the portrait right holder, but still can be used in the portrait, and does not constitute an infringement of the right of portrait, which will be for the portrait right, and the use of the portrait right holder, the use of his portrait. Infringement of the right of portrait, which provides a defense for the use of another person's portrait. These defenses provide the user with a reasonable use of the conditions, blocking the use of the portrait without the consent of the portrait right holder of the illegality of the use of their portraits.

China has not formulated specific legal provisions in this regard, but in judicial practice, the general grasp of:

1, in order to safeguard the interests of the state and the needs of the community, the use of newsworthy public figures portrait. Such as for national leaders, political activists and advanced figures reported on the use of portraits.

Public figures, is a certain identity and status, and has the news value of the characters, generally more well-known people from all walks of life, their activities are often involved in the country's political, economic, social life, culture and entertainment, etc., therefore, the use of its portrait for the report of its deeds, should be reasonable use. First, the use of the portraits of public figures for the purpose of safeguarding the interests of the state and society. Public figures is a certain identity and status, and has the news value of the characters, generally more well-known people from all walks of life, their activities are often involved in the country's politics, economy, social life, culture and entertainment, etc., therefore, in order to report on its deeds and the use of its portrait should be reasonable use, such as the president of the country, politicians, diplomats, scholars, inventors, writers, artists, actors, athletes, successful industrialists, etc., the use of their portraits should be reasonable use. Successful industrialists, etc., newsworthy, in order to report on their activities and the use of their portraits, although without their consent, but does not constitute infringement. For example, CCTV host Chen Mou and Public Security University teacher Li Mou v. COSCO Pharmaceuticals, Inc. infringement of their portrait rights dispute case, that is, for example, on July 5, 2000, by the Beijing Municipal Fengtai District People's Court of the first instance of the trial of Chen Mou and Li Mou two people lost the case. The case was that because the plaintiffs' photographs at the COSCO Photography Exhibition appeared in the defendant's advertising brochure, and the photographs were treated with a lightened background, Chen and Li believed that Shanxi COSCO had infringed on their right to portrait, and thus sued the court. After investigation, the court held that the COSCO Photography Exhibition in which Chen and Li were photographed was a social activity of public welfare. It was entirely possible to disseminate it to the public, and the technical processing of the photographs did not affect or distort the expression of their main contents. In addition, the advertisement and publicity booklet compiled and printed by COSCO-WELL was for the purpose of enhancing the company's popularity and shaping a good corporate image, without any direct profit-making purpose, and did not violate the relevant national laws and regulations. Every citizen enjoys portrait right, but the exercise of portrait right should be subject to certain restrictions. Finally, the court ruled that the portrait rights of Chen and Li were not violated.

2, the use of the portrait of people attending specific activities on specific occasions. Such as the portraits of people attending various rallies, parades, ceremonies, celebrations and other activities. Such activities are often newsworthy, the participants are in them, has shown that it has been a certain degree of renunciation of their portrait rights, anyone who participates in such activities shall not claim their portrait rights. The use of portraits formed on these specific occasions shall not constitute an infringement of the right to a portrait, but a reasonable use of portraits.

3. Photographic creations in scenic areas, using people as embellishments, or taking photographs that include other people in the photographs, on these occasions do not use people as the subject;

4. In order to exercise the legitimate right of public opinion (the Constitution stipulates that citizens have the right to supervise), and in order to criticize a certain kind of uncivilized behavior and conduct, in order to condemn the perpetrator's unlawful or immoral behavior, and to educate the public to To comply with the law, respect social morality, maintain social order, etc., to publish their uncivilized behavior and the use of citizens' portraits. Such as filming the destruction of social **** property, environmental pollution, etc.;

5, for the portrait of their own interests, the interests of other natural persons and other social purposes need to use their portraits. For example, in order to find people whose whereabouts are unknown and published in the press, television search for people when the use of my photo.

6, in litigation activities, as evidence (in criminal or civil, in the course of the litigation stage) and the use of citizen's portrait; state organs for the performance of official duties and the mandatory use of citizen's portrait. For example, the public security organs for the pursuit of fugitives or other suspects and the use of their portraits to make wanted notices.

7. The use of citizens' portraits by state organs for the purpose of enforcing and applying laws (e.g., in the process of administrative law enforcement);

8. The use of other people's portraits within a certain scope (mainly the scope of social openness) for the purpose of scientific research and cultural education, such as displaying patients' photographs on specific occasions or in professional newspapers for the purpose of clinical medical teaching and scientific research. Use of citizens' portraits.

Therefore, I personally believe that the use of citizens' likenesses should also pay attention to the following aspects:

I. Correctly understand the "illustrations and accompanying photographs" in the article are different from the news pictures and photographic reports.

Two, standardize the words of the description of the picture. (e.g., naming the work, etc.)

Three, do not believe in "verbal agreements".

4. Be careful about using images on magazine covers.

V. When submitting your work (for newspapers, magazines, and various film competitions), be careful to add restrictions on the authorization to use the work after the descriptive words.

Sixth, to participate in a variety of photography activities with the employment of models, pay attention to the content of the agreement between the organizer and the model.

Seven, the key is to obtain a written agreement from the portrait rights holder.

Although the law has been defined on the violation of citizens' portrait rights, but with the development of China's market economy, especially after the accession to the WTO, for the use of photographic works (scope), more and more can not get rid of the "interests" of the influence, especially the penetration of economic factors. Therefore, on the whole, China's laws on the legal protection of portrait rights are still relatively principle. For example, how to define what is "for profit", whether the pictures in the news media are for profit; the portrait right of public figures, especially politicians, the entertainment industry, etc.; the definition of the right to use the portrait of the deceased, and so on. When we deal with photographic portraits, the problems we encounter are often very specific, so when we rely on these abstract terms to deal with the specific things we encountered is very difficult, and here the most difficult is the "profit-making purpose". Therefore, as a photographer, when taking portraits of people, especially when using them, it is important to be careful, to follow the law, and to have a basis - these three things are very important. I mean everyone has the right to a portrait, if you want to use someone else's portrait, after someone else's consent - this is the most secure (so I deliberately brought a few today on the "portrait use", "works of art") I have brought a few samples of contracts and agreements on "use of likeness", "agency", etc., just for your reference).

Some common questions about portrait rights:

1. Do companies have the right to use their employees' portraits?

The answer is yes: no!

2. Does the right to a likeness only concern the "face"?

No! Whenever people see the portrait, always associated with the record of the legal subject of personality characteristics, this personality characteristics of human society is an important resource, its potential huge commercial value for the modern business community is particularly important (such as the recent TCL cell phone ads, the Korean female movie star.)

Visual images of other body parts with distinctive features will also be reminiscent of the recorded legal subject and the personality traits of the legal subject. Therefore, visualizations of other body parts with distinctive features are also portraits and are also within the scope of protection of portrait rights.

Whether it constitutes a "portrait" is a natural person's front face as the center, but also should be examined in society in general, to be a comprehensive and integrated judgment. It can be seen, but if the side or other parts of the performance, and the general public has been able to determine who is represented, then the side or other parts of the performance also constitutes a "portrait".

3. Is there a question of portrait rights in group photographs?

Yes. As we all know, the individual portrait of the portrait of the personality rights of the person is independent, once infringed upon, the portrait of the person can claim their rights to the infringer according to law. But the collective portrait of the portrait right has its own characteristics, the collective portrait is the rights of the independent portrait of the collector, with independence and unity of identity characteristics. First, the portrait of each person in the photo enjoys independent personality rights; on the other hand, in the physical collective portrait and indivisible qualities (each person has the right to independently claim the right).

From the current judicial practice, it is generally: if the user of the collective portrait of a particular person, there is malicious destruction, staining or ugliness, etc., the specific person's personality rights of the weight of the degree is sufficient to cover the whole of the portrait of the right holder, the infringement of its portrait is obvious.

Secondly, in determining whether the use of the collective portrait infringes on the collective portrait of a particular individual's right to portrait, whether the user is for the purpose of profit, whether there is commercial use? Should be a basic basis.

It can be seen that the degree of legal protection of the collective portrait is lower than the individual portrait, that is to say: the collective portrait of the individual's right to a certain limitation, such limitations to ensure that the whole group of people on the reasonable use of the limit. (Only because the current law is not perfect)

4, shooting photos of other people arguing whether it constitutes an infringement of the right of portrait?

This depends on whether there is a situation that prevents the violation of the law. For example, a store salesman has a quarrel with a customer and his attitude is very bad. This situation is a negative phenomenon in society in terms of social benefits, as the salesperson's bad attitude and lack of reasoning with the customer are against the salesperson's professional ethics. The disclosure of such a negative phenomenon is favorable to the progress of society. For these reasons, such an incident is undoubtedly a piece of social news, and any citizen has the right to report news, and taking news photos is one of the means of reporting news. Taking photographs of such scenes is the use of other people's likenesses for the benefit of society, and does not constitute an infringement of the salesman's right to a likeness.

But if it's two brothers arguing and you. Then generally speaking, it's not 。。。。

5, administrative organs or relevant units can be "photo exposure" of citizens' portraits?

For example, a bus station caught a few thieves, but not a crime, with the local public security police station to post their portraits in the mall, "photo exposure", in order to remind passengers attention. This seems to be the intention is good, well-intentioned, "thief incident" there are illegal causes, but 。。。。

The arbitrary use of other people's photographs, especially the posting of other people's photographs in public, and because of such posting and the related text description caused by an unspecified majority of people on the negative evaluation of the person, it is very likely to constitute a violation of other people's right to portrait. The "thief incident" mentioned above can only be resolved through legal means and procedures. Even if it is a crime, it can only be notified by the People's Court in accordance with legal procedures and regulations.

According to the Administrative Penalty Law, the types and ranges of administrative penalties can only be set by laws, regulations and departmental rules, and other normative documents may not set administrative penalties. There is a principle here: that is, as far as administrative organs are concerned, government organs cannot do what is not authorized by law; as far as citizens are concerned, they can do what is not prohibited by law.

So, checking all the laws, rules and regulations, it is not possible to find the public security organs can be in the form of the citizen's photo, posted in public to punish. Therefore, the behavior of the public security police station is a kind of arbitrary infringement.

6, known to be "infringement", the victim's protection period?

Remember there is a very famous photo, is "after the closure of the taste" (news photos). The photo with the text is: "is smoking a boring smoke is the former Shenyang city explosion-proof apparatus factory director Shi Yong step." The photo was taken in 1986 and published in China Youth Daily, which was a national sensation. In April 1999, Shi Yongjie took the author and the media to court, arguing that the report actually demeaned and scandalized the plaintiff and violated his right to portrait and reputation.

According to China's General Principles of Civil Law, the statute of limitations for petitioning the people's court for protection of civil rights is two years. That is to say: when the right to know or should know that their rights have been infringed on the date of two years did not file a lawsuit to the people's court, the right to the people's court will no longer enjoy the right to request protection. That is to say, the right of the right holder's right to win the lawsuit is annihilated. So, in fact, Shi Yongjie's lawsuit has exceeded the statute of limitations prescribed by law, and no longer have the right to win.

7, the principle of good faith !

I remember in the "People's Photography" newspaper, a writer wrote a "portrait rights to deal with a method of entanglement", describing how to obtain their own so-called "authorization" of the portrait of the secret. That is, after taking a picture of the subject, the photographed person is asked to leave his name and address on a blank piece of paper, which will be sent to the photographed person for enlargement, while in fact, the other side of the blank paper is a folded page, on which there is a statement of consent to publish or the like. This type of practice is not desirable!

China's "General Principles of Civil Law" and "Contract Law" are made "invalid civil behavior" provisions. Such as article 52 of the contract law: a party to fraud, coercion to conclude a contract is considered invalid contract.

At the same time, China's "General Principles of Civil Law" also stipulates the corresponding principles, one is: "voluntary, fair, equal pay, honesty and credit" principle, of which the "honesty and credit" principle is known as the "imperial clause" here. The emperor clause" here refers to: First, the civil Lord Hugh in civil activities, in accordance with honesty and trust in the exercise of their rights and obligations, shall not be abused, shall not be detrimental to the interests of others, and shall not be contrary to the interests of the state or the social public ****. Second, in the contract interpretation, should be based on honesty and credit. That is, the court or arbitration institution for contract interpretation, should be based on the principle of good faith, determine right and wrong, determine responsibility. Third, the principle of good faith to make up for the inadequacy of the law. This is important in this last third point, "good faith" principle gives the judicial officer certain discretion! So people call the emperor clause. That is to say: in the case of legal loopholes, the principle of good faith can be interpreted and fill the law.