Anonimo
言語: 日本語

人を撮影するとき

スペインで人を撮影するとき：撮影してもいい？投稿してもいい？

これは一般的な情報であって法的助言ではありません。すべての記述は一次資料にリンクしています。2026-10-17に確認。

このページはまだ翻訳されておらず、リンク先の資料と照合した英語版を表示しています。

公共の場での撮影は一般に認められています。識別できる人物の公開には通常、1982年組織法第1号（Ley Orgánica 1/1982）とデータ保護法に基づく同意が必要で、公人や付随的な映り込みには例外があります。

公共の場で人を撮影してもいい？

The main rule on filming people is civil, not criminal: the Ley Orgánica 1/1982 de protección civil del derecho al honor, a la intimidad personal y familiar y a la propia imagen (the Honour, Privacy and Image Act, LO 1/1982). Article 7.5 treats capturing, reproducing or publishing a person's image, in places or moments of private life "or outside them", as an intrusion unless an article 8.2 exception applies. Article 2 says the protection is set by law and by social custom, and that there is no intrusion where the person gave express consent (LO 1/1982, arts. 2 and 7).

Article 8.2 lists the exceptions: people holding public office or a profession with public notoriety, photographed at a public event or in a place open to the public; caricature; and pictures of a public event where a particular person appears only as an accessory element (LO 1/1982, art. 8.2). In STC 72/2007 the Tribunal Constitucional (Constitutional Court) upheld a Supreme Court ruling that a newspaper photo of a municipal police sergeant at an eviction in the street, accessory to a truthful news report, fell within these exceptions, so truthful information of public interest prevailed over her image right (STC 72/2007).

Filming an identifiable person is also processing personal data, so the GDPR applies unless the household exemption covers you (RGPD, art. 2.2.c).

投稿してもいい？

Publishing is where the rules bite. The AEPD (Agencia Española de Protección de Datos, the data protection authority) says that putting images of other people online requires their consent (or another legal ground), and for children under 14 the consent of parents or guardians; posting to an open profile means sharing with an unknown audience, which needs prior authorisation (AEPD blog, 2018).

The LO 1/1982 exceptions still apply when you publish: public figures at public events, and people who appear only incidentally in images of a public event. Using someone's image, name or voice for advertising or commercial purposes is a separate intrusion under article 7.6 (LO 1/1982, arts. 7.6 and 8.2).

Freedom of expression weighs on the other side; the LOPDGDD states that everyone has the right to freedom of expression on the Internet (LOPDGDD, art. 85). A person who objects to an identifiable image can ask whoever posted it to erase it and, if that fails, complain to the AEPD (AEPD blog, 2018).

子どもの場合は何が変わる？

No separate filming statute exists for children, but consent is stricter. Under LO 1/1982 art. 3 a minor consents personally if mature enough; otherwise a legal representative consents in writing after notifying the Ministerio Fiscal (public prosecutor), who can object (LO 1/1982, art. 3). The Ley Orgánica 3/2018 (LOPDGDD, the Data Protection and Digital Rights Act) lets minors consent to processing of their data from age 14; below 14 the parents consent, and spreading minors' images on social networks in a way that may breach their rights brings in the Ministerio Fiscal (LOPDGDD, arts. 7 and 84).

The Fiscalía General del Estado's Instrucción 2/2006 tells prosecutors that images of minors in public places that appear only casually or as an accessory to the main information are not, as a rule, unlawful, but where the setting carries negative connotations the image must be distorted so the child cannot be identified (Instrucción 2/2006). For school events outside its teaching role, the AEPD says a school must explain how it will use the images and ask consent before recording and publishing (from pupils over 14 themselves, otherwise from parents), while relatives filming for family use fall under the household exemption (AEPD FAQ, school events).

私的利用と公開の違い

The GDPR does not apply to processing by a natural person "in the exercise of exclusively personal or household activities" (RGPD, art. 2.2.c). The AEPD applies this to family videos: filming a school show for domestic use is outside the GDPR, but posting the same images "en abierto" (openly) on social networks is processing that needs the consent of the people shown (AEPD FAQ, school events). LO 1/1982 art. 7.5 covers capturing as well as publishing, so the civil image right is not limited to what goes online (LO 1/1982, art. 7.5).

顔をぼかすと何が変わる？

Blurring removes the main identifier, and the Fiscalía itself tells prosecutors that a child shown in a negative context must be made unidentifiable by distorting the image (Instrucción 2/2006). But blurring is not anonymisation. The AEPD's anonymisation guidance says the aim is irreversibility and that re-identification risk from other linkable data must be assessed (AEPD, Orientaciones sobre anonimización); the Article 29 Working Party says pseudonymisation "is not a method of anonymisation" (WP29 Opinion 05/2014). A blurred face can still be personal data if voice, name, tattoos, clothing, location or the caption identify the person.

法律がはっきりしていない点

Whether a bystander in a street vlog is an "accessory" element under art. 8.2.c is decided case by case; the statute gives no bright line (LO 1/1982, art. 8.2). An image may fall within an art. 8.2 exception yet still need a data protection legal basis once posted online; the AEPD guidance we found deals with family and school images, not with vloggers (AEPD blog, 2018).

Two government bills before the Congreso de los Diputados would change rules described here. One would replace LO 1/1982 with a new act (Proyecto de Ley Orgánica 121/000103); the other would raise the age for consenting to data processing from 14 to 16 (Proyecto de Ley Orgánica 121/000052). Until they are passed and published in the BOE, the current texts apply.

出典

撮影地のルールがどうであれ、同意を得ていない人の顔をぼかしてから投稿するのが、いちばん簡単に安全側に立つ方法です。Anonimoなら動画をアップロードせずに、iPhone上でそれができます。

他の国