Does posting other people's photos online infringe on other people's portrait rights?

Publishing other people's photos online without the photographer's consent is an infringement of other people's portrait rights.

According to the General Principles of the Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) and Article 100 of the Civil Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), citizens have the right to portrait, and their portraits may not be used for profit without their consent.

However, whether it is for profit or not is never a necessary condition for infringing on the right of portrait. Article 100 of the General Principles of Civil Law is a prohibitive provision. It is a prohibitive provision for users from the perspective of users, and does not define the composition of infringement of portrait rights. Therefore, it can't be considered that making profits is an important element of infringing the right of portrait.

Extended data:

You can't use the portrait of a citizen for profit without my consent. This sentence does not mean that you can use the portrait of a citizen for profit without my consent. From the point of formal logic, it is a logical negative proposition that "citizens' portrait rights shall not be used for profit without their consent", including condition P: "with their consent" and conclusion Q: "using citizens' portraits for profit".

This proposition can be expressed as: "It's not P, it's not Q". After double negation, the negative proposition reverts to its original proposition "If P, then Q", that is, "With my consent, I can use citizen portraits for profit", which has exactly the same meaning as the clause.

However, if this article is understood as "citizen portraits can be used for non-profit purposes without my consent", the condition P has not changed, the conclusion has changed from the original Q to W (citizen portraits can be used for non-profit purposes), and the proposition has become "if it is not P, then it is W", which is quite different from the original proposition and cannot be deduced from it.

In practice, there are also many acts of violating citizens' portrait rights for the purpose of non-profit, such as intentional retaliation and intentional defacing of citizens' portraits. Therefore, whether it is for profit or not does not affect the determination that it constitutes an infringement of portrait rights, but only affects the determination of tort liability.

Hunan court network-friends circle publishing photos of others may infringe on portrait rights.