Your holiday photos are online, and one picture shows a fellow student who never agreed to be posted. Or you want to share a group photo from a flat party and wonder whether that is allowed. The right to one’s own image protects people against their likeness being distributed without consent. This guide explains when you may publish photos of other people, when you may not, and which exceptions exist.
Short answer: You generally may only distribute or publicly display a photo showing a recognisable person with that person’s consent. Section 22 of the German Art Copyright Act (KunstUrhG), formerly KUG, sets this rule. Exceptions under Section 23 apply, for example to incidental figures next to a landscape, to people taking part in an assembly and to images from contemporary history, but not where a legitimate interest of the person depicted is violated. Last updated: November 2026.
Key points
- As a rule, publishing a photo in which a person is recognisable requires that person’s consent.
- Distributing covers any form of passing the image on, including a story, a large group chat or a public profile.
- Section 23 KunstUrhG names exceptions, for example people appearing as incidental figures next to a landscape or taking part in an assembly.
- Consent can also arise implicitly, but it is hard to prove when in doubt. Ask explicitly if you are unsure.
- Data protection law can also play a role, especially with recordings that affect many people.
What exactly does the law prohibit?
The central provision states in its first sentence that images may only be distributed or publicly displayed with the consent of the person depicted. The law therefore does not attach to taking a picture but to publishing it. Keeping a photo on your phone is judged differently from posting it in a story. Anyone who keeps an image only for themselves generally does not infringe the right to their own image.
Under the second sentence, consent is presumed in doubt if the person depicted received payment for posing. That case concerns models and paid shoots, rarely private photos among students. For private pictures you generally need a separate permission.
When may you post photos without consent?
Section 23 (1) KunstUrhG names four exceptions. They only apply if the requirements are met in the individual case. The art exception in no. 4 also applies only to images that were not made on commission. Under Section 23 (2), the permission also does not extend to uses that violate a legitimate interest of the person depicted. The overview below helps with a first classification but does not replace reading the statute.
| Motive | Classification under the law |
|---|---|
| Portrait or close-up of a person | Consent required (Section 22 sentence 1) |
| Person as incidental figure next to a landscape or place | Exception under Section 23 (1) no. 2 |
| Taking part in an assembly or procession | Exception under Section 23 (1) no. 3 |
| Image from contemporary history | Exception under Section 23 (1) no. 1, depends on the case |
| Image not made on commission that serves a higher interest in art | Exception under Section 23 (1) no. 4, only if both conditions are met, depends on the case |
A group photo from a party therefore does not automatically fall under an exception. The people are usually the point of such a picture rather than incidental figures. If someone stands at the centre of the picture, ask before the photo goes online. A short question in the group chat, combined with the option to delete the picture, is helpful.
What about photos already found online?
An image that already circulates on the internet may not simply be passed on because it is publicly accessible. The right to one’s own image applies regardless of where you got the photo. A separate guide deals with the copyright in the photo itself: Abmahnung wegen fremder Fotos: Was du jetzt tun kannst (in German). That guide concerns the rights in the picture, while this one concerns the depicted person.
What changes for children and young people?
With minors, the balance is weighed especially carefully. Parents usually give consent for photos of children, but older teenagers should also be asked. For students this matters mainly when they photograph children during club activities, tutoring or holiday jobs. A photo published without permission can quickly cause trouble there, even if it was meant harmlessly.
How to obtain consent properly
Consent does not have to be formal, but it should be traceable. A short message stating where the photo will appear is often enough. Name the channel, such as Instagram or the club website, and say whether the picture will stay up permanently or only for a short time. Consent refers to the purpose named. A photo for a club notice board is not consent for an advertising campaign.
If someone later withdraws consent, remove the photo promptly. Keep your message containing the consent so that you can show what was agreed.
What are the consequences of a breach?
The consequences of publishing a photo unlawfully depend on the individual case, for example on how the picture was distributed and what damage it caused. The person depicted can generally demand that you remove the picture. Anyone who causes damage through publication must in principle compensate for it. With especially harmful recordings, criminal law may also play a role. It is therefore wiser to ask before posting than to delete afterwards.
A warning letter or a letter from the lawyer of the person depicted is also possible. Do not react hastily. Check the complaint and secure the messages in which consent was discussed. A calm reply that removes the picture ends the matter in many cases without further costs.
Frequently asked questions
May I post a photo of myself and friends if other people are visible?
The right to one’s own image applies to every recognisable person here as well. You therefore need the consent of the other people, as far as they are clearly recognisable. Blurred faces reduce the problem but do not solve it in every case, because other features can still make a person identifiable.
Does this also apply to photos from a public demonstration?
For assemblies and processions, Section 23 (1) no. 3 names an exception, provided the persons shown took part in them. Pictures that single out individuals do not automatically fall under this exception. When in doubt, look at the context of the picture.
Must I delete photos immediately if someone asks?
Anyone who withdraws consent or does not want publication should react promptly. Whether a claim to deletion exists depends on the individual case. Quick removal usually avoids the largest dispute.
Is it enough if the person is in the background?
That depends on whether the person appears only as an incidental figure. Under Section 23 (1) no. 2, persons who appear next to a landscape or another place fall under the exception. If the person is the focus of the picture, it is no longer incidental.
What to do now
- Check whether a person is recognisable in the photo and whether that person is the focus.
- Classify the motive using the table and read Sections 22 and 23 KunstUrhG if needed.
- Obtain consent that names the channel and the duration of publication.
- Remove the photo promptly if consent is withdrawn.
Related guides
- Digital Rights in Everyday Life: An Overview for Students
- Abmahnung wegen fremder Fotos: Was du jetzt tun kannst (in German)
- May Landlords or Employers Copy Your ID Card?
- Creative Commons: using and crediting images correctly
- Right to Erasure: How to Have Your Data Removed from Online Services
Sources: Section 22 KunstUrhG, gesetze-im-internet.de, wording checked, accessed 2 November 2026 (German text), Section 23 KunstUrhG, gesetze-im-internet.de, wording of paras. 1 and 2 checked, accessed 2 November 2026 (German text)
Last updated: November 2026. This guide is general information, not individual advice.
