Images published in the news without authorization

The plaintiff sued for the unauthorized use of his image to accompany and illustrate a newspaper article.

The first instance court upheld the claim against the editor and owner of the newspaper.

On appeal, the Civil Court stated that the right to our own image is characterized by the freedom of deciding regarding the capturing, reproduction and broadcasting of the image, acts that would be, in principle, forbidden without the consent of the individual, regardless of whether such use causes damage.  

In addition, the Court highlighted the protection that section 1071 bis of the Civil Code (in force at that time) gives to the right to image by governing the possible measures that the offended individual may take for an arbitrary intrusion into his life by the publication of his or her portrait.

In so deciding, the Court of Appeals considered that the plaintiff would have proven that the image used in the newspaper article would correspond to him and that he would not have granted his consent for such publication. Furthermore, the Court also considered that the fact that the plaintiff had published this image in Facebook or that such image had been obtained from Google does not allow third parties to use the image without the plaintiff’s consent, even more so if such use of the image was not essential for the publishing of the article.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Court of Appeals found no material damage to the plaintiff, but upheld the claim for moral damage, by understanding that it was caused by the fact of the unlawful use. Consequently, the Court of Appeals ordered the defendant to pay the sum of AR$300,000 to the plaintiff for moral damages.