l_d_allan: I would appreciate a follow-up on where/when/how such images can and cannot be used. I am a bit surprised the included pictures can be used in a public article such as this one without model releases, but I acknowledge ignorance on this.
Certainly, a photograper can legally take pictures at a public place for private use. And the rules are different for news, people in the news, and public figures.
However, I've also been confronted by upset parents at a soccer game while taking pictures. And what about uploading images of strangers to a public photo-sharing site? And when underage children are involved?
I think I'd be unhappy if this article had a candid picture of me, taken at a public place, but without a model release.
just as my humble opinion, i would say the man in the concert should not be able to sue. He is doing whatever he is doing in a public place where other people could also see and tell his wife., even via her facebook wall (another public place). would he then sue his wife's friend for writing? or sue FB for providing this medium of communication?
is there a line (even if gray) between publishing a photo where a person is the leading subject and another photo where there is a crowd of people as subjects? In the former case, you are photographing that person with the surrounding around him/her. In the latter case you are photographing an environment (public) with that person in it.Perhaps that line can designate when to get the model release and when not to bother.