http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm

As it says, in general, you may take pictures in public spaces (parks, streets, sidewalks or really any place where you wouldn’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy ) without asking for permission from anyone in the field of view. Property owners may bar photography on their premises, but cannot stop you from taking a picture of their property from say across the street.

And yes, I would probably need to your permission to use your image for commercial purposes (though this link only addresses photography in public spaces in general)

Of course there are always exceptions and local ordinances may vary.

It also depends upon how the image is used. Someone can’t take a photo of you (without your permission) and use it in an advertisement (For instance, you’re eating a burger at a burger joint, they can’t just take a photo and say “Matty loves our grilled burger.”) But, they can take a restaurant photograph, and if you just happen to be inside, the could possibly use that (That said, in all my years of advertising, we still got waivers/releases for anyone on screen.)

Public spaces/monuments I would bet still fall underneath the “you don’t have privacy” clause. So the Parks Dept. in DC could take a photo of the Washington Monument for an advertisement, and if you happen to be in it, tough.

Like I said though, still photography isn’t really my scene though…. Those are just the laws I would play by.

Under general production guidelines, if they’re on a public street (at a monument, outside the White House, etc.) it’s considered a “public space” and they can film all they want without releases. This is how local news can go out and capture footage of people during news stories and not get sued.

The rules change when it comes to private property though. Generally speaking, if you’re in an area where one could assume is private or privately owned, you have a right to not being filmed. That’s why when the “Hills” shoots in bars/restaurants in LA, they go up to people that they think will still be eating/partying once they start filming and get release forms. Now if the club has signed a release form for the “Real World”, all that does it protect TRW from being sued from a club member. That does NOT protect the WSC from being sued by said club member, because while WSC may be fine with TRW filming inside, if club members didn’t sign release forms (and there’s no section in the membership contract regarding implied release/waiver during filming) WSC could loose it’s gym shorts in the lawsuit. That said, if there were signs up in the yoga room (or on the door to the club etc.) that indicated that filming was going on and permission was implied, you’re screwed and don’t have a case.

//Production law is sooooo much fun
////Also if they blur your face to the point where it’s not recognizable (ala COPS) you don’t have a case either… sorry!