Mugshot

[Laurenterama]

Is it legal to repost online someone's mugshot?

 

[quincy]

Is it legal to repost online someone's mugshot?

First, what is the name of your state, Laurenterama?

Second, is it an attorney who is thinking of reposting online someone's mugshot? If not, the Legal Ethics and Lawyer Malpractice section of the forum is not the correct forum for your question.

It can be legal to repost online someone's mugshot if the state releases the mugshot for publication - and not all states will, as they consider it exempt from disclosure.

 

[justalayman]

Is it legal to repost online someone's mugshot?

Sometimes, sometimes not. In itself it isn't illegal in most cases. The concern would be if there are any copyright issues involved. Apparently it varies across the country whether the images are in the public domain or the images are covered by copyright protections.

 

[quincy]

Sometimes, sometimes not. In itself it isn't illegal in most cases. The concern would be if there are any copyright issues involved. Apparently it varies across the country whether the images are in the public domain or the images are covered by copyright protections.

The legal issue is not one of copyrights but one of privacy rights, when mug shot cases have reached the court level.

But the state name really matters in this. The publication of mug shots can violate the laws of various states.

That said, I am thinking this is not a legal ethics/lawyer malpractice question.

 

[justalayman]

The legal issue is not one of copyrights but one of privacy rights, when mug shot cases have reached the court level.

But the state name really matters in this. The publication of mug shots can violate the laws of various states.

That said, I am thinking this is not a legal ethics/lawyer malpractice question.

can you point to something that addresses the lack of a copyright issue? From what i have read, unless applicable state law relinquishes claims of copyright ownership of mugshots, it is up to the discretion of the owner to relinquish or assert a claim of ownership.


As to being illegal to publish mugshots; the only thing I have found so far are laws prohibiting publishing them and demanding payment to take them down.

 

[quincy]

can you point to something that addresses the lack of a copyright issue? From what i have read, unless applicable state law relinquishes claims of copyright ownership of mugshots, it is up to the discretion of the owner to relinquish or assert a claim of ownership.


As to being illegal to publish mugshots; the only thing I have found so far are laws prohibiting publishing them and demanding payment to take them down.

I prefer to wait for the state name before addressing any of this. The states have varied widely in how they view mug shots, their publication, and the rights that are held.

Depending on the state, mug shots are part of public records that can be released under a freedom of information request. Federal mug shots have no copyright protection as they are taken by federal employees during the course of their employment. These mug shots are in the public domain.

That said, what protects any mug shot from publication by others will be, not only the agencies that hold the mug shots, but the freedom of information laws in the states where the mug shots were taken. Some agencies refuse to release mug shots under privacy right exemptions.

Again, how mug shots have been handled have varied from state to state, circuit to circuit.

 

[quincy]

Although several states have taken action against mug shot websites that offer removal of mug shots for a fee (calling the practice "extortion"), and many state law enforcement agencies now no longer publish mug shots on their official sites to prevent easy access for individuals who hope to profit off the mug shots on their commercial websites, following is a link to the US Court of Appeals case decision out of the 6th Circuit that supports the privacy rights of individuals in their mug shots.

Detroit Free Press, Inc. v. United States Department of Justice, US Ct App Sixth Cir, No. 14-1670, July 14, 2016: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-6th-circuit/1742220.html

The Court said: "Individuals enjoy a non-trivial privacy interest in their booking photos."

The 6th Circuit decision is similar to the US Court of Appeals decision out of the 11th Circuit in 2011 and the US Court of Appeals decision out of the 10th Circuit in 2012.

In Karantsalis v. United States Department of Justice (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-11th-circuit/1559304.html), the Court said that "... releasing the booking photographs ... would be an unwarranted invasion of his personal privacy under Exemption 7(c)."

In World Publishing Company v. United States Department of Justice (http://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/11/11-5063.pdf), the Court said, "We also draw a comparison between the sensitive nature of the subject matter in a rap sheet, and the vivid and personal portrayal of a person's likeness in a booking photograph."

I have added this only because it does not appear that Laurenterama will be back to provide her state name (see https://forum.freeadvice.com/open-technical-issues-requests-no-legal-questions-68/how-can-i-change-my-username-618294.html).