THE RIGHT TO SELF IMAGE: THE CONSENT GIVEN TO CREATE OR USE A PERSON’S IMAGE IN THE NEW CIVIL CODE. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT. right to self provided by art. 58 of the new Civil Code is a personality right, a primary right for everyone, next to the rights to life, health, physical and mental integrity, honor and reputation, respect for the private life. Like the name, the represents an identifying element for the person and this supposes that every person is entitled to oppose to the disclosure, by any means, of elements of his/her life and to the reproduction of the without his/her consent. possibility of a person to prevent the use of his/her is based on individual autonomy.Keywords: personality, personality right, agreement, valuable consideration, reproduction, image-source, image-reproduction, privacy, legal prerogatives, the memory of the deceasedThe right to self provided by art. 58 of the new Civil Code is a personality right, a primary right for everyone, next to the rights to life, health, physical and mental integrity, honor and reputation, respect for the private life.1The right to self is a particular right because its features are not exactly the same as the general features of those other rights. Thus, the right to self may be subject to an agreement for valuable consideration, consequently the can be sold and its extra-patrimoniality is only relative. Today, we are witnessing a shift of the right to image, from an absolute to a relative right.2The term good off trade has become relative. If the transmission of the human body is problematic,3 the same cannot be said about the acts through which we dispose of ourselves, without alienating us; these transactions are perfectly legitimate. With some reservations, particularly the respect for the human dignity, the agreements through which a right to use a person is granted, are perfectly lawful, no matter the elements of the personality: the concession of body use, of labour, image, voice and personal information. These agreements can be concluded for valuable consideration, but that does not transform the elements of the human person in heritage elements because the heritage acquires only alienable assets.4Article 73 of the new Civil Code, entitled The right to self image provides: (1) Every person has the right to his/her own image. (2) In exercising the right to self image, he/she may prohibit or hinder the reproduction in any manner, of his/her physical appearance or voice or, where appropriate, the use of such reproduction. provisions of art. 75 remain applicable.5Like the name, the represents an identifying element for the person and this supposes that every person is entitled to oppose to the disclosure, by any means, of elements of his/her life and to the reproduction of the without his/her consent. possibility of a person to prevent the use of his/her is based on individual autonomy.6The right to is an autonomous right, analyzed however in the context of the personality protection, but many authors considered it included in the right to privacy. A violation of the right to must be considered independently from a violation of the privacy. Moreover, the capture of a person's is worth the same, whether it is done in public or in private places7.However, the European Court of Human Rights recognized the person's right to his/her own as a component of the respect for privacy. publication of a person's without his/her consent, which would have the effect of prejudicing him/her materially or morally, is an infringement of art. 8 of the Convention. In the case Peck v. the United Kingdom, 2003, broadcasting on television, in an informing campaign, the of the applicant during an attempted suicide, surprised by a camera that was part of a closed circuit, constituted a serious and disproportionate violation of his private life and, consequently, an infringement of art. 8.8Following the example of article 36 of the Quebec province Civil Code, the New Civil Code shows in article 74, nine examples of cases of privacy violation, but we are interested only in three of them, namely: the capture or use of the or voice of a person found in a private place, without his/her consent, the dissemination of materials containing images of a person in medical treatment facilities, as well as of personal data concerning health, problems of diagnosis, prognosis, treatment, circumstances related to the disease and other various facts, including autopsy results, without the concerned person's consent, and if the person is deceased, without the femily or entitled persons' consent; the use in bad faith of the name, image, voice or resemblance to another person. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".