He doesn't have any COPYRIGHT rights. they belong to the person who took the pic, or whoever he sold those rts to (the archive).
He might have had rights not to have his personal details processed under data protection without his consent - ie his image - but recent case law makes it unlikely he'd even have that claim (Durant) as he wasn't the "focus" of the pic, just incidentally included.
If it clearly seemed to imply he was skiving off work and he was identifiable, he might have a claim for libel.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-08-22 01:01 pm (UTC)He might have had rights not to have his personal details processed under data protection without his consent - ie his image - but recent case law makes it unlikely he'd even have that claim (Durant) as he wasn't the "focus" of the pic, just incidentally included.
If it clearly seemed to imply he was skiving off work and he was identifiable, he might have a claim for libel.
You can't just talk about "rights".