Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- National reporters
- General editors' preface
- Preface
- Editorial note
- List of abbreviations
- Part I Mapping the legal landscape
- Part II Case studies
- 4 Case 1: The corrupt politician
- 5 Case 2: Convicted law professor
- 6 Case 3: The paedophile case
- 7 Case 4: An invented life story?
- 8 Case 5: A former statesman's family life
- 9 Case 6: A satirical magazine
- 10 Case 7: A snapshot of a person
- 11 Case 8: A paparazzo's telephoto lens
- 12 Case 9: Naked.Little.Girl.Com
- 13 Case 10: The late famous tennis player
- 14 Case 11: The popular TV presenter
- 15 Case 12: Copied emails
- 16 Case 13: Brigitte's diaries
- 17 Case 14: Tape recordings of a committee meeting
- 18 Case 15: ‘Light cigarettes reduce the risk of cancer’
- 19 Case 16: Doctor's non-disclosure of a foetal disease
- 20 Case 17: WAF – A gang of incompetents?
- Part III A common core of personality protection
- Index
10 - Case 7: A snapshot of a person
from Part II - Case studies
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 July 2010
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- National reporters
- General editors' preface
- Preface
- Editorial note
- List of abbreviations
- Part I Mapping the legal landscape
- Part II Case studies
- 4 Case 1: The corrupt politician
- 5 Case 2: Convicted law professor
- 6 Case 3: The paedophile case
- 7 Case 4: An invented life story?
- 8 Case 5: A former statesman's family life
- 9 Case 6: A satirical magazine
- 10 Case 7: A snapshot of a person
- 11 Case 8: A paparazzo's telephoto lens
- 12 Case 9: Naked.Little.Girl.Com
- 13 Case 10: The late famous tennis player
- 14 Case 11: The popular TV presenter
- 15 Case 12: Copied emails
- 16 Case 13: Brigitte's diaries
- 17 Case 14: Tape recordings of a committee meeting
- 18 Case 15: ‘Light cigarettes reduce the risk of cancer’
- 19 Case 16: Doctor's non-disclosure of a foetal disease
- 20 Case 17: WAF – A gang of incompetents?
- Part III A common core of personality protection
- Index
Summary
Case
Sally took a snapshot of person X in a market place without asking this person's permission. Does X have a claim against Sally? Does it make a difference, if:
(a) X is famous or not;
(b) X is at work/is attending to his private affairs;
(c) the picture is published or not.
Discussions
Austria
Operative rules
X is not granted a claim in both situations (a) and (b). If, as suggested under hypothesis (c), the picture is published, X only has a claim for forbearance, publication of the judgment, abatement and restitution of both pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss under certain circumstances. A claim of unjust enrichment, however, appears highly improbable.
Descriptive formants
With regard to situation (a), it appears rather unlikely that X has any remedy against the mere taking of the picture irrespective of whether he is famous or not. The present case deals with the protection of privacy which can, in principle, be realised through the right to image according to § 78 UrhG (Urheberechtsgesetz, Copyright Act). However, this provision only awards a claim if the picture is published; the mere taking of the picture is not sufficient to merit a claim.
Other provisions aimed at preventing the violation of privacy which could be applicable are § 1328a ABGB and § 16 ABGB, together with Art. 8 ECHR.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Personality Rights in European Tort Law , pp. 275 - 316Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2010