I think Germany is not the same as the US in regards to expectations of privacy in public when it comes to photography. Also there are plenty of signs and warnings at CCC to respect privacy and not take pics without consent…
I think Germany is not the same as the US in regards to expectations of privacy in public when it comes to photography. Also there are plenty of signs and warnings at CCC to respect privacy and not take pics without consent…
Yes, Germany absolutely has a right to privacy in the public sphere
It's a nuanced right that has to be weighted against other rights and societal benefits. On the street it's usually easy: your picture can contain crowds or people who are there incidentally, but if you point the camera at a person you need their consent. But at a gathering like the CCC even being an identifiable member of the crowd might create issues for people, and you have to take that into account as photographer (both ethically and legally)
>It's a nuanced right
Well, having lived there I'd describe it thus: You might get shouted at for taking a harmless picture at a conference; They brag about their great "data protection" laws, and the same same day you read in the news how yet another of their universities got hacked and how some incompetent government agency leaked the sensitive private information of hundreds of thousands of their citizens. Not that anyone cares or that anyone would get punished for it. But don't you dare forget adding cookie popups to your website or trying to build a finance app without extremely invasive and questionable KYC.
Privacy-mindedness with German characteristics.
> They brag about their great "data protection" laws, and the same same day you read in the news how yet another of their universities got hacked and how some incompetent government agency leaked the sensitive private information of hundreds of thousands of their citizens.
I would claim those people from Germany who are very privacy-minded indeed have a huge distrust of these data collections exactly because they know that sooner or later someone will crack these systems.
FYI, cookie popups aren't required by law and the USA is the cause of global financial KYC. Hopefully the upcoming dedollarization fixes that.
>if you point the camera at a person you need their consent
In public spaces (streets, squares, etc.), you may generally photograph people without consent for purely private/non-commercial purposes, as long as it is not intrusive, secretive in a way that invades privacy, or shows them in a state of helplessness, intimacy, or compromise (the latter can also trigger criminal provisions under § 201a StGB).
Casual or incidental street photography is usually fine; highly targeted or harassing photography of individuals can still violate general personality rights.
However - the key rule (Recht am eigenen Bild under §§ 22–23 Kunsturhebergesetz / KUG) mainly restricts publishing or publicly displaying recognizable images of people, not merely taking them in public.
This is a distinction many Germans do not quite comprehend - but it is also the case that it’s not very well understood in the USA, too.
Disclaimer: I am a recordist, I am responsible for a few well-received (even by the original artists themselves) bootleg recordings of famous gigs, I have a strong bias towards recording public environments and a heavy aversion to any censorship, whatsoever. Given that, however, if someone asks me not to take their picture, I first give them the option of receiving a copy for their own purposes, and if they decline, I respectfully delete.
> I have a strong bias towards recording public environments and a heavy aversion to any censorship, whatsoever.
This is a balancing of legally protected interests [Güterabwägung] between privacy and censhorship. Independently of what the law may say, many Germans are strongly biased towards privacy here. Be also aware that in Germany the strong US-American concept of "free speech" does not exist; the laws that do exist are weaker.
> Given that, however, if someone asks me not to take their picture, I first give them the option of receiving a copy for their own purposes, and if they decline, I respectfully delete.
Why not ask for permission instead of objection? (even if, as you claim, the formal written law may be on your side)
> Why not ask for permission instead of objection?
Because in most cases it was never my intention to photograph a stranger - they imposed this into the conversation by contacting me - most of the time I’m taking pictures of a lovely park, or a nice flower arrangement, or the broken beer glasses in the street after Carnival - and it is only after being interrupted that I offer the option. I certainly do not take photographs of random strangers unless it somehow captures the idyl of the scene, usually.
And in many cases actually, the conversation starts off irritable but ends quite friendly, especially if the photo is a good one and the person changes their mind and wants a copy.
It is possible to pivot from annoyance to friendliness. Especially if one understands the laws and the reasoning behind them. Ask for forgiveness, not permission.