> I sure wish I could non-consent to people observing me in the world,
You aren't allowed to use photos featuring a non-consenting person to, for instance promote a product.
You are allowed to use photos including a non-consenting person.
There's a lot of complicated law, differing between different jurisdictions to cover this question, and to balance the needs of the public with commercial desires. It's not as simple as you make it sound, and there's no reason we should just default to bending over backwards for commercial interests.
Laws exist to serve society, not the other way around.
I'm sure that the people who are being constantly victimized by paparazzi would like to know those rules that you just quoted, and have them be enforced.
If you had done a little research into this question, you'd realize that 1A use cases ('journalism') are treated by law quite differently than use of likeness for commercial intent.
This is my whole point. There isn't a single, one-size-fits-all rule that a five year old can comprehend that describes any particular country's legal framework around the many, many different dimensions of tension between public and private interests on this incredibly broad question.
And none of the existing frameworks fit the new use cases well, and we should probably have an open political debate about what we want to do going forward.
Okay? What will that prove? That you can be an ass?
Being an ass is generally not illegal. Particular behaviours might be, but no legal or social system intends to censure you for every possible one, and most people who are experts in law or ethics don't believe that they should.
If you identify particular problems with the particular paparazzi laws in your country, that's an interesting conversation, and maybe, if framed well, an interesting data point for this discussion, but is not in itself the 'last word' on it. Just because you can torture an analogy, doesn't mean the analogy has a lot of power.
> consent
Careful... A lot of people online have selective understanding when it comes to this concept. It's selfishness and self-centredness taken to it's extreme, and not seeing other people as humans, but as tools for their consumption to be used and tossed aside for pleasure or for profit. It's one of the most disgusting things I've layed eyes on.
You aren't allowed to use photos featuring a non-consenting person to, for instance promote a product.
You are allowed to use photos including a non-consenting person.
There's a lot of complicated law, differing between different jurisdictions to cover this question, and to balance the needs of the public with commercial desires. It's not as simple as you make it sound, and there's no reason we should just default to bending over backwards for commercial interests.
Laws exist to serve society, not the other way around.