Disclosure: This post may contain affiliate links. I earn a small commission of product sales to keep this website going.
This great question came from Jenny in New Zealand. She had photographed a child crouched on a street in France years ago. An innocent, candid moment with part of the child’s face visible. She wondered:
- Was the photo legal to take?
- Can she sell it as a print?
- Does she need permission or compensation?
These questions come up constantly in street and travel photography. And while laws vary by country, the principles are surprisingly consistent.
Before we dive in, the obligatory disclaimer:
I’m not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. This article is based primarily on U.S. law and general international norms. Always research local laws when traveling.
With that out of the way, let’s break this into two parts:
- Is it legal?
- Is it ethical?
They are not always the same.
Is Photographing People in Public Legal?
Capturing the Photo (the act of taking it)
In most countries, photographing people in a public place is legal, because:
There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public space.

If someone is outside, walking down a street, sitting in a park, or browsing a market, they’re generally considered fair game. Courts recognize that by being in public, you’re implicitly consenting to the possibility of being photographed.
This typically applies to adults and children.
However…
There are important exceptions:
- Private areas within public spaces (restrooms, fitting rooms, medical facilities)
- Harassment or stalking
- Interfering with emergency services
- Countries with strict image rights (e.g., France, Hungary, South Korea)
- Countries where photographing police/military is restricted
And some places distinguish between:
- Being the main subject, versus
- Being an incidental person in a larger scene
This matters later when discussing publishing and commercial use.
Tip:
Before traveling, search “photo rights in ___” for your destination. Or visit the Wikimedia “Photographs of Identifiable People” table, which is an excellent starter reference.

Can You Publish or Sell Photos of People Taken in Public?
Once the photo legally exists, the rules about using it are quite different.
The big question: Are you using the photo for editorial or commercial purposes?
Editorial Use (almost always allowed)
Editorial includes:
- Social media posts
- Personal website/portfolio
- Documentary work
- News/editorial articles
- Educational use
- Artistic prints
As long as:
- You’re not defaming the subject
- You’re not implying endorsement
…you’re generally allowed to publish the photo without permission.
This is why magazines, news outlets, and street photographers publish images of strangers every day.
Selling prints is editorial, not commercial
This is a common misunderstanding.
Selling prints is considered art, not advertising.
The New York Supreme Court cemented this in Nussenzweig v. diCorcia – the photographer sold street portraits without model releases, and the court upheld it as protected artistic expression.
This is U.S. law, but similar reasoning appears in many countries.

Commercial Use (requires permission)
Commercial = endorsements and advertising.
Examples:
- Using someone’s face to market your workshop
- A billboard or ad
- Anything implying “this person supports this product”
- Using the photo in promotional material
For commercial use, you need written permission – a model release – from anyone who could be:
- Identified (even with tattoos, uniforms, logos, etc.)
- Associated with the advertisement
Even if the photo was taken legally, using it commercially without permission is not allowed.

This is why stock agencies won’t accept people shots without a release. They can’t control how the image might be used later.
Tip: If someone is the clear subject of a portrait and you think you might someday license the image commercially, get a release. I carry a small stack with me. You can download a sample of forms here:

Is Photographing People in Public Ethical?
(Not the same as legal.)
Street and travel photographers often find themselves in situations where they’ve captured something legal but… questionable.
The ethics are simple: Apply the Golden Rule
Ask yourself: Would I want someone to take and use this photo of me?
Think about:
- Vulnerability
- Dignity
- Context
- Potential harm
- Power dynamic (adult vs. child, housed vs. unhoused)
Example: Photographing someone experiencing homelessness
Legal? Often, yes. Ethical? Possibly not.
If they’re:
- Changing clothes
- Bathing
- Crying
- In obvious distress
…photographing them without consent crosses a line for most of us.
But if you:
- Talk with them
- Ask permission
- Share their story respectfully
…it can be both ethical and powerful.
Example: Someone asks you to stop photographing
In the U.S., you’re not legally required to stop.
But ethically? You should. It comes down to simple human decency.
I discussed this further in an interview with Valérie Jardin – her thoughts are fantastic for anyone nervous about photographing strangers. You can read that here.

Case Study: Jenny’s Photo in France
Jenny’s image shows the top of a child’s head and part of the face. The child is doing nothing compromising or identifiable.
Legal?
Most likely yes, even under French privacy laws. The child is:
- Not identifiable
- Not defamed
- Not in a private moment
- Photographed in public
- Depicted respectfully
Ethical?
Yes, in my opinion. It’s an innocent moment of curiosity, not exploitation.
Sellable as a print?
In most countries, yes. It’s art, not advertising.
Would stock agencies accept it?
Almost certainly not, because they can’t control how buyers might use it commercially.
Final Thoughts
Photographing people in public is both a legal topic and an ethical one. Understanding both is part of being a thoughtful photographer.
To recap:
- It’s usually legal to photograph people in public
- Editorial use is generally allowed
- Commercial use requires permission
- Ethics matter just as much as the law
- Research local laws before traveling
Learning the legal and ethical boundaries – and practicing how to approach strangers respectfully – will give you more confidence on the street.
Have thoughts or experiences on this topic? Share them below – I’d love to hear them.

Curt Brooks
Thursday 8th of June 2023
Personally, I see nothing wrong with the specific photo in question, and the photographer is probably within her rights to use it as she see fit (please note that I am not an attorney and this is my personal opinion only). And I also see nothing that I would construe as "exploitation" in this photo. That said, I now make it a point to try and photograph children from behind whenever possible - as John stated, I try to apply the "golden rule" in terms of what I would have wanted concerning photos of my children when they were young.
A question for John - is there a photo release that you could share? I'm thinking of an electronic version that I could use from my phone. Or would you recommend a paper copy?
John Peltier
Saturday 10th of June 2023
There's example release forms in the Better Photography Through Visual Storytelling course but I'll add a link in this article to example forms. These are simple paper forms I carry in my camera bag just in case. Can't go wrong with paper. I also have an app called EasyRelease for when I don't have/run out of the paper forms. You can create your own releases in it and have people sign digital copies.
Ronny
Tuesday 30th of May 2023
Yeah, selling a photo of a child that is not your own is kinda weak in the moral aspects. As for this photo there is nothing original about it or artistically significant about the photo. It's just exploiting the child.
Ian Morris
Wednesday 31st of May 2023
@John Peltier, In my view a photograph is either ethical or not and the artistic quality of the image should have no baring on this at all, ever. Once we start making such 'convenient' distinctions then we are on a very slippery and dangerous slope.
John Peltier
Tuesday 30th of May 2023
The artistic qualities of the photo are a separate, unrelated discussion. Photography is personal expression, which is different for everyone.
There are also plenty of renowned street photographers who have sold prints of amazing photographs containing children who are not theirs.
Or does the artistic quality of the photograph change how ethical it is to sell it? Not a rhetorical question, I'm curious what people think about that.