Re: I don't understand all the ramifications, but...
You do not and cannot own copyright to your face, copyright is for created "man-made" works. What you have is "personality rights". I can take your picture in a public place..
Ah.. Be wary of your background. Like buildings, being man-made can have their own image rights that may or may not be pursued depending on it's architect, owner or trustee. Notable examples being trying to take pics in/on the Underground. Partly for safety, ie dazzling drivers with flashes as the're pulling into a station, people tripping over news/film crews or just selfie takers becoming crispy critters after falling off the platform. And it has a media unit for flogging commercial rights and managing pesky 'elf & safety issues properly.
Then there's the National Trust. Woe betide anyone trying to do commercial stuff in/on properties given over to the 'public trust' because they'll also flog you licences.. Like you say, when it gets commercial, it gets complicated. I think this case is interesting because it's a bit of copyright, and moral rights. So if a 'personal' image ends up being commercially exploited, it seems only fair that the copyright holder benefits, even if that may not have been the intent when the pic was taken.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
