15 October 2026

I would never put my child’s photo into AI. Except it’s probably already there.

By Jess Pembroke, Chief Operating Officer

My child’s school photo day is fast approaching and, inevitably, so is the bill for a lovely, albeit expensive photograph. School photography day meant I read with particular interest a recent BBC News report about parents using AI tools to remove watermarks from school photographs rather than paying for them.[1]

At first glance, this looks straightforward. Technology is being used to get around paying for costly prints. However, the story raises much more fundamental questions about copyright, children’s privacy, AI literacy and how little visibility any of us may have over the technology processing our personal data.

The copyright issue

Taking high-quality professional photographs, like those commissioned by a school, is likely to be somebody’s livelihood. The BBC spoke to school and sports photographers who said people were taking watermarked preview images and using AI to remove the marks. Photographer Ian Gilbert put it bluntly: “It is theft, it is shoplifting.”

It might be my child, and their school, and I pay for a copy of the photograph – but the copyright in the photograph will belong to the photographer who took the image. Removing the watermark and copying the photograph will almost likely constitute copyright infringement.

The economic consequences are real. Sports photographer Dylan Evans described finding one of his photographs on Instagram with its watermark removed, despite not having been paid. Some people may not see the issue, but if people routinely took my professional advice without paying for it, I would soon be out of a job. A photographer’s expertise and creative work deserve the same respect.

The bigger privacy question

Imagine that a parent screenshots a preview of their child’s school photograph, uploads it to an AI service and types a simple instruction: “Remove the watermark.” Where has that photograph gone? Who is processing it, where is it being processed, how long is it retained, and could it be reviewed by a person or used to improve or train a system? What if it is a group photograph containing somebody else’s child?

The honest answer is that it depends on the service and its terms. That is precisely the problem. Most parents are not carrying out supplier due diligence before trying an online AI tool. Understandably, they are unlikely to read pages of privacy notices and terms to establish exactly what happens to an uploaded image.

That matters because an image is not simply anonymous data. A photograph of a child is personal information about an identifiable person. The BBC provides a particularly striking example: a child had missed a school photograph because they were ill, so a parent later used AI to add them to it. The motivation is completely understandable, yet manipulating a group photograph in this way may involve uploading images of other children without their parents’ knowledge or consent[2]. As a parent, I work hard to protect my child’s privacy, and I would expect others to show the same duty of care.

Perhaps I could go completely analogue: use a film camera, print photographs and avoid the cloud altogether. But what would that mean in practice? Should I refuse group photographs or ask my child to stand aside when their class gathers for a picture to take home? Even if I do not consent to my child’s image being shared (especially on social media) someone at a birthday party may take a photograph on their phone. A grandparent might upload one. A sports club might use an app, a school might use a digital photography provider, and the apps already on our phones increasingly include AI-powered features.

So, can I really say with confidence that my child’s photographs are not already being processed by AI-enabled technology?

As data subjects, we have rights under the UK General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Act 2018. But those rights do not give us complete control over the technology used by every organisation that we or our children encounter.

The law places responsibilities on organisations acting as data controllers. They must understand how personal data is handled and carry out appropriate checks. It does not, however, allow me to choose or directly influence every piece of software used by a photographer, school, nursery or sports club.

In simple terms, I can choose to pay for the school photograph, but I may still know very little about the technology the photographer uses afterwards.

AI tools are now marketed specifically to professional photographers for parts of their workflow. A quick online search finds AI tools for a range of photographic tasks for use by professional photographers. That does not mean my child’s school photographer uses any particular AI product, and using AI does not automatically mean images are handled improperly. It does mean organisations need to ask better questions—and that we need clear, strong regulation to set meaningful standards and protect people’s rights in this rapidly evolving space.

If a photographer, school, nursery, sports club or other organisation uses an AI-enabled product involving photographs, does it understand what the supplier does with those images? What do the contract or data processor addendum says? Are additional processors involved? Where might the data be processed, could it be internationally? Is uploaded material retained? Could human review occur? Might content be used for model improvement or training?

The important question therefore cannot simply be “How do I keep my child’s photographs away from AI?” Increasingly, I think the better question is “How do we make sure organisations introducing AI into services involving children understand and manage the consequences?”

Responsibility cannot sit solely with individual parents. It must also sit with the organisations choosing, procuring and governing the technology.

Why AI ethics and governance matter

AI is here to stay, and proponents say it can offer enormous opportunities, and photographers, schools, charities, cultural organisations and businesses should be able to benefit from it. But innovation must be accompanied by serious consideration of privacy, copyright, transparency, accountability, human oversight and risk.

For smaller organisations and self-employed professionals, this can be particularly difficult. A photographer may be excellent at photography without also being an expert in AI governance, copyright licensing, data protection law and technology procurement. Yet professionals are increasingly being asked to make product decisions that touch all of those areas.

Practical governance for responsible AI

At Naomi Korn Associates, this intersection between AI, copyright and data protection is exactly why we advocate a joined-up approach. We help organisations with:

AI governance frameworks, policies and procedures
AI risk assessments, impact assessments and AI-specific Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs)
Copyright, intellectual property, procurement and supplier due diligence
AI training, awareness and bespoke governance support

The objective is not to prevent organisations from using AI. Good governance should enable responsible innovation rather than create unnecessary barriers.

A useful starting point is deceptively simple: Do you know which of your suppliers and systems use AI, and what happens to personal data when they do?

Upcoming course: AI and Data Protection Law, a CPD-accredited, half-day intermediate course introduces the complex challenges that artificial intelligence (AI) presents to personal data protection. You’ll explore how AI interacts with UK data protection law, including the Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR, and examine critical principles such as lawfulness, fairness, transparency, and security. The course is next running on 1 December 2026 (9:30am-1pm). Book your place now via the link above, or reach out to us at info@naomikorn.com.

Sources and further reading

Naomi Korn Associates, Artificial Intelligence: Responsible AI. Practical governance. Expert support: https://naomikorn.com/artificial-intelligence-ai/
Aftershoot, 18 Best AI Tools for Photographers 2026 (By Workflow): https://aftershoot.com/blog/ai-tools-for-photographers/
GreenBot, Microsoft And Google AI Tools May Use Human Reviewers: Here’s What You Need To Know: https://www.greenbot.com/ai-human-reviewers/