Photography and the rights of the subject?

This is a hypothetical situation:

An individual photographs people on the street as they pass by or while engaged in normal activities without asking for their consent. Later that individual sells the photos to a magazines which in turn integrate them into their page layout and make a profit from the sale of the magazine. Can the individuals who were photographed legally demand compensation from either the photographer or magazine?

paparazzi do it all the time... do you think those celebs ever get a dime from 'candid shots' NO. if they did, all the rag mags would be out of business.

legally, pictures belong to the photographer. That's also why you have to pay a copyright fee to be able to reproduce any professional pictures of yourself. Also, if a friend takes a picture of you, legally that picture is his to do with as he pleases... he can post it online without your permission, as long as you are not a minor.

Nope. If you're in public that is completely legal, they don't need a release and they don't need to give you any money. I'm not sure what you mean by 'engaged in normal activities' but if those activities are in a public place or viewable from a public place I think there's no legal right to compensation.

that would be an interest situation. technically the pictures belong to the individual that took them.
but generally speaking it is appropriate to get a waiver from people whos pictures you take if they are intended to be published.
i would say they probably could assert a claim for compensation or a claim for unlawful publishing of their image.

This will depend on how the photographs were used and what laws are in place at that location.

Usually, it is legal to take images from public locations and generally people do not have an expectation of privacy (IN the United States) when they are in public, but even this is not always true. What matters more, however is how the images are used. My understanding for example is that in New York, anyone who uses an image of another person for promotional purposes (such as advertising) must have the permission of that person in writing (a model release) at least if that person is recognizable.

Photos used for editorial purposes generally do not require a release. For example , you could take an image of a crowded intersection and to a piece on how crowded New York is and this would not be violating anyone's rights.

Usually it is the responsibility of the publisher, not the photographer to be sure an image is properly released. (Because the photographer doesn't know and can't be responsible for how the image will ultimatley be used) However, it's common for a photographer to obtain the release from the subject and pass it on with the images.