You share a photo found on Google in a blog post, without checking the rights associated with the image. This very common reflex can cost up to 45,000 euros in fines and one year in prison in France. The case of Béatrice Vonderweidt illustrates the problem well: a private, discreet individual whose pictures circulate on sites unrelated to her background, often without any authorization.
Burden of proof of consent: the trap that publishers ignore
You have purchased the rights to a photo from a photographer. You think you are in the clear. In reality, the purchase of the photographer’s rights does not cover the consent of the subject. These are two distinct permissions, and the confusion between the two is the source of the majority of disputes.
Further reading : Boost Your B2B Business Growth with Concrete and Effective Methods
Under French law, it is the person publishing the image who must prove that they have the written consent of the photographed person. Not the other way around. If you use a photo of Béatrice Vonderweidt found on a social network or a third-party site, you bear this burden of proof, even if the picture has already been shared hundreds of times.
An in-depth article analyzes Béatrice Vonderweidt’s photos on Olivia Style from a legal perspective and details the checks to be made before any republication.
Related reading : Everything You Need to Know About Car Insurance with MAE: Coverage and Benefits
A written record of consent refers to a dated, signed document specifying the context of use (medium, duration, territory). A simple oral “she agreed” does not constitute admissible proof in court.
Photos and “name and shame”: French law facing unauthorized dissemination
Publishing a photo of a person without their consent does not only fall under the classic right to image. For several years, French courts have increasingly cracked down on what is known as “private justice” online.
Distributing a person’s face to publicly identify them exposes you to criminal prosecution, whether it concerns an alleged theft, a personal conflict, or a simple desire to “make a buzz.” The penalties can go up to one year in prison and 45,000 euros in fines, according to reports by TF1 Info.
This framework also applies to non-famous individuals. Béatrice Vonderweidt, a former model turned painter, is not a public figure in the legal sense. Her status as a private individual strengthens the protection of her image. Using her photos to illustrate a lifestyle article, for example, without a direct connection to her activity, constitutes a misuse that the law penalizes.
Right to image in France: concrete mistakes to avoid
The right to image is based on Article 9 of the Civil Code. The GDPR adds an additional layer: republishing a person’s photo constitutes the processing of personal data, even if the image is already circulating freely on the Internet.
Here are the most common mistakes made by website publishers and bloggers:
- Assuming that a photo found online is free of rights: the visibility of an image on a search engine does not confer any exploitation rights. Consent remains the default legal basis.
- Confusing the photographer’s copyright with the subject’s right to image: these are two separate permissions, both necessary for legal publication.
- Publishing a photo by “blurring” part of the face: if the person remains identifiable by the context (name in the article, recognizable clothing, specific location), blurring does not legally protect the publisher.
- Ignoring a removal request: when a person requests the deletion of their photo, the GDPR imposes a right to erasure. Failing to respond within a reasonable time worsens the situation in case of legal proceedings.
The specific case of social networks
You find a photo of Béatrice Vonderweidt on Instagram or Facebook. The terms of use of these platforms allow sharing within their ecosystem (the “share” button, embedding). Downloading the image to republish it on your own site is a completely different process.
Natively sharing on a social network does not equate to consent for external republication. This nuance escapes many content creators who think they are complying with the law by citing the source.
Privacy and photos: checks before publication
Before publishing a person’s photo on your site, a series of checks is necessary. The goal is not to forgo all illustration but to adopt a framework that protects both the photographed subject and the publisher.
- Do you have written consent from the photographed person, specifying the medium and duration of use?
- Have you acquired exploitation rights from the photographer or agency, in addition to the subject’s consent?
- Is the image used in a context consistent with the permission granted (a photo authorized for a fashion magazine is not automatically authorized for a culinary blog)?
- Have you established a process to handle removal requests within a reasonable time?
These steps may seem burdensome. They are less so than managing a formal notice or legal action. A rigorous publication framework avoids almost all disputes related to the right to image.
The journey of Béatrice Vonderweidt, who transitioned from modeling to painting, illustrates a frequent paradox: photos taken in a specific professional context end up being reused years later in completely different contexts, without the person being informed. Checking your rights before clicking “publish” takes a few minutes and avoids months of legal proceedings.