What is Digg?Sponsored by Norton 2010
Cybercrime makes more money than illegal drugs. view!
everyclickmatters.com - See the top masterminds behind the biggest cyberscams ever--and what they cost us all.
32 Comments
- mikebeauchamp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Some things to be aware of:
One night I was downtown with a friend and the cops were arresting someone right in front of us, so I took a picture. A few seconds later, a cop came and asked me for my camera. After I refused to give it to him, he took it from me and formatted the memory card and gave me back the camera. I was pissed off and frustrated so I followed him across the street asking him why he formatted the memory card, and he kept saying that he didn't know what I was talking about. So I snapped another picture of him so I can identify him when I write up my complaint to the Dept. This time, he threw me against a garbage bin and cuffed me and I spent the night in the drunk tank, never having drank in my life. I got the police report through the Freedom of Information act, where the officer claimed I was leading a group of 10 people protesting on the sidewalk (WTF?), with no mention of a camera. So I filed a huge complaint with the police and a Staff Sgt. apologized to me, claiming the officers are under a lot of stress, etc.
So yeah, anyways, my point of this whole thing is... This website might state you can take pictures freely and legally, but these laws and freedoms don't apply when you are taking pictures of the people that are supposed to enforce them... especially when they can wipe out the memory card to erase all evidence. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3FOX News took a break from their usual anti-pedophile hysteria to run a story about a woman who was the "victim" of "blouse down" photography. The pundits bemoaned the lack of laws on this, and the ubiquitousness of cell phone cameras. They want to make it illegal to take photos of women showing cleavage, showing their panties, or just looking sexy and underage, without their permission. Now, this is pretty standard stuff, but something came together for me just now...
If they can stop you from taking pictures of cleavage, they can stop you from taking pictures of flag-draped coffins. They can stop you from taking pictures of police brutality, war crimes, and so on. FOX News wants to sell this to the American people in the form of a moral crusade against perversion. - nogami, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2t928: Why don't you believe it? From my very brief read through, it seems fairly accurate to me (I work in the industry).
The main point that every photographer should know is that NOBODY can seize your camera, or your film/storage media without a court order. They can demand it until they're blue in the face but you do not have to give it to them under any circumstances. And if they try and prevent you from leaving unless you give up your property, you can also go after them for false imprisonment...
The police can temporarily take your camera (if you're being arrested because you're trespassing, for example), but they can't destroy or alter your photographs or media in any way, so you can recover your property when you are released. - harmlessinc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The Photographer's Right in PDF format
http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm
Not sure if the writer of the story knows it or not but this isn't a new issue. Nice to see it getting some media attention so a digg for that. - Whatchamacallit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah but go to NYC and start taking pictures of bridges, subways, and other large landmarks like the NYC public library and you will attract unwanted attention! Especially, if you have to be Pakistani, Arab, or African. You will then find yourself being investigated by the FBI, NSA, CIA, and Homeland Security for obvious reasons. "Yelling, Help!, Help I'm being repressed!" won't help much nor will trying to argue with a NYC policeman or FBI agent about how it's legal to take those photos.
Use some basic judgement, taking photos is all well and good when it doesn't hurt anyone. If someone approaches you and wants you to hand over the film (digital or otherwise) and you refuse, it's quite possible for you to be assaulted. Yeah, it's illegal for someone to take your film but how are you gonna stop them when they have a baseball bat? Yeah, assault is illegal too but it sucks getting hit in the face with a baseball bat! If you think you are some kind of paparazzi photographer, be prepared to be assaulted. - Eaglefire, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Forgot to say that taking another picture after deleting one you wanted to keep will likely overwrite the old picture's data.
- Moby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Last month, I was confronted by a security guard because I took a picture of building; the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, VA to be exact. Long story short--he said he was going to "smash my !@#$'ing camera" unless I deleted the picture. I'm an amateur photographer and I know my rights, but literally standing up to an angry 300lb gorilla is another thing.
- DJPandemonium, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A couple years ago I was taking some pictures near a dam on the Columbia River near my house, and some passing gaurd person of some type flipped out just as I was trying to leave. She pulled her pickup in front of me, and told me I had to give her my camera. She said that people taking pictures around dams are considered terrorist suspects.
I argued with her for a couple minutes, and finally I swerved around her pickup and sped off. She was following me for awhile, but I was on my motorcycle, so that only lasted until we got to the highway. - Eaglefire, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If someone asks you to delete a photo from your camera, and you really want to keep it, don't sweat it. Show them as you delete the photo, then take out the memory card and swap it for another.
When you get home, use http://www3.telus.net/mikebike/RESTORATION.html to un-delete the photo. They're happy because they think you deleted the photo, and you're happy because you didn't. Hooray! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I always rely on DIGG for my legal advice.
- t928, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Interesting read :) Somehow I dont really believe it, though..
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I can understand some things being sensitive, like government buildings and police activity. You wouldn't want someone standing in front of your house taking pictures, or taking pictures of you working, without knowing the reason (and believing) beforehand. I don't think you have the right to go and break that persons camera, but you should be able to fight for ownership of the pictures. I don't believe ownership of the pictures should be decided at the police officer level, because he will always delete incriminating photos of himself or a friend.
- DJPandemonium, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Forgot to say: I guess dams are considered goverment buildings that are NOT OK to photograph.
So, be sure you have a fast vehicle. :-) - nogami, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0nedbit: "so does this apply for concerts an similar events?"
Yes, it does. If you manage to get your camera into an event and take photographs, the most they can legally do is ask you to leave. They don't have any rights to your camera or your pictures, and they can't legally restrain you if you wish to leave. If they want your pictures confiscated or erased, they need to go through the court system to do it legally. However, if you use those pictures in a way which infringes on the artist's rights, you may be legally liable and open yourself to lawsuits.
Of course, if there are agressive bouncers/security there, they might very well ignore your legal rights and simply take the camera away and destroy it (unlikely), or delete the pictures or ruin the film (far more likely). If they were to damage your property, you could sue them - you'd have a much more difficult time proving damages in court if they simply erased/destroyed.
(my legal experience in this is based in Canada, however it's more or less the same for the US - other countries may vary). - Dash-2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Great article!
- abstractia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0kinderstod, why so anti-blog? Blogs can have some pretty great content.
- oldcyborg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0As with everything else, If you piss somebody off, bad enough for them to demand your camera, denying them is possibly not in your best interests. Don't forget the old "fist in the face trick". You better be a big dude, and carrying, if you want to run around snapping pics of strangers. Strangers can pick up bricks, and throw a Picture of a brick at you.....
Richard Pryor said that that was what Jim Brown used to do.... I believe him...
Cyborg
nastyno - nogami, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Eaglefire: Yup, that's a very good point - the data can be un-deleted so long as it hasn't been over-written with other data. Even a format can usually be recovered via software (typically camera formatting is a quick-format which just wipes the FAT and doesn't acutally write-over the old data area, as flash memory has a finite lifespan and read-write cycles will reduce the lifespan).
Might be "interesting" to buy some old memory cards or used cameras with memory cards off ebay and do some data recovery and see what you get :P - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@Moby
You should have let him do it, and then sued the bank. This may actually be a good scam you've stumbled upon. - TridenTBoy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Um, this doesn't in apply in France sadly.
- otomo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1conigs: just block/report it, and they go away like a leaf in the wind.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0that was kindda interesting.. hard to beleive...
Happy New year from [Geeks Are Sexy]
http://geeksaresexy.blogspot.com - SkipM5, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Try taking pictures of security locations with your camera, no matter what type, if your stopped and refuse to surrender be ready to be arrested and your camera confiscated period. If your in China and do that be ready to spend a long time in jail, no matter if your an American or what ever; most countries with the exception of Canada and a few other ultra liberal countries, have laws about taking pictures where you are not suppose to be taking pictures, if you don't believe me, go take a picture of a secret military base and see what happens. Stupid is what stupid does.
- MasterDwarf, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0papiers please...
- alceria, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0I thought everyone knew this...
- cheeseron, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0What's your problem, man?
- conigs, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0[okay, last off-topic post in this thread, I swear]
@otomo: I do block/report it. The problem is that it's still there in the first place. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Thanks +Digg
--
http://www.diggfans.com - Digg's Largest Community - Digg Deeper - conigs, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0@cheeseron:
Not sure if they're still here, but there were about 60 comments that were just a tinyurl link followed by a number... I rated a bunch as -3 SPAM... then decided blocking/reporting the user was easier. - conigs, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Seriously... the spam is getting out of control.
- kinderstod, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0if( strstr( 'blog', $site_url ) )
{
$no_digg++;
} - conigs, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0Fsking spammers.... go to hell.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is