An Austrian street photographer posted his photos of a busy street on his public website. He probably wasn't expecting a visit from the Austrian DPA (DSB), and was shocked when they ruled that his candid shots violated privacy laws, and ordered him to delete multiple photographs.
The case hinged on several particularly problematic photographs. Some individuals depicted were wearing kippas, their Jewish identity made visible without prior consent - violating rules on processing sensitive data under Article 9(1) of the GDPR. Women photographed from above angles showed cleavage and undergarments - these were deemed invasive enough to reference Austria's criminal code on unauthorized intimate imagery. Even diners in restaurants were classified as moments of "personal vulnerability," with the DSB ruling that people shouldn't expect to be photographed during leisure activities, even in public spaces.
Can street photography survive in the age of GDPR? The photographer certainly thought not, arguing that requiring consent would make his art form impossible. He leaned heavily on artistic freedom protections, but the DSB reinforced that data protection principles apply even to artistic expression. The photographer's occasional verbal warnings and business card distribution were dismissed as inadequate alternatives to proper consent. Had the photographer informed his subjects and gained their consent prior to photographing them, a complaint may have been avoided.
There is ample space for exploring the tensions between artistic expression and privacy in an age where anyone can be instantly, permanently published online. Can street photography survive as a genre in our privacy-conscious world?
