a question of privacy

[Jade4u]

Anyone who snaps a picture of a child should expect to have his camera busted. I consider a child as much a parents private property as a photographer would his lesser valuable camera. Anyone who takes pictures of children should always ask permission to do so in my opinion.

If camera men or photographers are brought into schools the parents are infromed and have the right to decline no matter if it is for a parachute club they make up or whatever the case is. If cameras are brought in parents have the right to chose. If a parent is sitting in a park and their child goes down a slide and the parent sees someone shoot this they should definately grab that camera and it should be smashed to pieces. Why on earth would anyone need a picture of a child except to fantisize etc... When fantasies are not enough they become abductions.

There must be deeper rulings on conditions on whether or not photos are permitted or not in public places. Suspicious behaviour persay should be one.

 

[CocktailWiener]

http://ambientlight.ca/laws.shtml
Ambient Light - Photography Laws

 

[CocktailWiener]

Good detective work Mr Jones. I am wondering however what caused the ridicule that the subject was put through? I mean, if you're just sitting on some steps, that's no reason for anyone to say anything. But if say her undies were showing, or she had a humongous cameltoe happening, I could see that.

I also find it strange that anyone reading an arts mag would ridicule someone who appears in it? I should think they'd be flattered that they're featured in an art mag.

Anyhow, the supreme court's ruling is about as clear as mud and I would bet that someone, sometime will challenge it.

She was eating a slice of pizza while sitting on some steps. The picture was published on the cover of an art magazine without her consent. Her friends saw the picture and made fun of her. Her family managed to prove emotional distress and the court awarded damage of a couple thousand dollars. I think it was somewhere around 2000 to 5000 range.

The court were applying the French Civil Code which is practiced in the province of Quebec.

 

[CocktailWiener]

One public thing you can't do is.....
If I am standing on the street taking photos through your front window then that is illegal (even if you were standing naked at it ... I wish Chantelle)

I quite agree with this.

Although there was a peculiar case in BC a little while ago. A guy was masturbating inside his house near a window and his neighbours watched him with binoculars and called the cops.

There were great distances in between houses in that neck of the wood so the guy wasn't expecting anyone to see him. Still, the court ruled that he had committed an indecent act because he should have expected people to see him when he's close to a window.

 

[tboy]

Anyone who snaps a picture of a child should expect to have his camera busted. I consider a child as much a parents private property as a photographer would his lesser valuable camera. Anyone who takes pictures of children should always ask permission to do so in my opinion.

If camera men or photographers are brought into schools the parents are infromed and have the right to decline no matter if it is for a parachute club they make up or whatever the case is. If cameras are brought in parents have the right to chose. If a parent is sitting in a park and their child goes down a slide and the parent sees someone shoot this they should definately grab that camera and it should be smashed to pieces. Why on earth would anyone need a picture of a child except to fantisize etc... When fantasies are not enough they become abductions.

There must be deeper rulings on conditions on whether or not photos are permitted or not in public places. Suspicious behaviour persay should be one.

So, according to you ANYONE who takes pictures of kids is a perv? What meds are you on?? Really? Is THAT how your mind works? And a kid is PROPERTY? Holy shit, do you really think that? So if a parent isn't happy that their kid has brown hair/brown eyes they can sell them? Jesus.....

A perfect example is the post earlier in this thread where the photog wanted a shot of a soccer ball and the goalie's hands....nothing wrong with that, unless he has a soccer ball fetish.

So I guess according to how you think, anyone who takes pictures of women in bikinis is a rapist? Someone who shoots hot cars is an autophobe? Jesus woman, if that is how you see the world, I'd seriously think about some therapy.

For the record I've seen hundreds of photos of kids that truly capture some amazing moments: I saw one of a little league game where this kid was sliding into third and the photog caught the sand flying, the look of determination on the runner's face, the fear in the third baseman's face, it was awesome and had NOTHING to do with being a perv...it was just a great shot.

For the record if anyone ever tried to smash MY camera? They'd better have their health insurance paid up because they would sure need it. Now if they asked me to delete the pic? No problem. Or if I was using my film (yeah I still have one) camera I'd destroy the neg when I developed it.

 

[Jade4u]

OMG Have your coffee yet this morning? I said if the behaviour is suspicious and stop and think where morons hang out is usually in groups of children in parks. Anyone who sells children or it even occurs in thier mind must be on meds.

Oh and btw I do think it is wrong just to walk up to a woman in a bikini and snap her picture without asking as well.

 

[oldjones]

OMG Have your coffee yet this morning? I said if the behaviour is suspicious and stop and think where morons hang out is usually in groups of children in parks. Anyone who sells children or it even occurs in thier mind must be on meds.

Oh and btw I do think it is wrong just to walk up to a woman in a bikini and snap her picture without asking as well.

Yeah, and you said your suspicions justified grabbing the camera and smashing it. Maybe you should cut down your coffee, before you get arrested and charged w/ assault. Better: stay away from places where children play. After all, "where morons hang out is usually in groups of children in parks" and you don't want to get tempted to start smashing cameras and labelled.

 

[Jade4u]

Yeah well the FBI must have false warnings on thier sites read number 10

http://losangeles.fbi.gov/abduction.htm

 

[PussyHunter]

Jade4u
Please read number 10 again. It says if a child is approached and asked. I have lenses that I could sit half a mile away and take all the closeup photo's I like and you would never know. I think there is much more to worry about than people taking pictures in this world. More events take place over the internet.

By the way if you would so much as touch my camera gear I would be the one laying charges against you and sueing for damages.

As far as beaches are concerned it still falls under a "PUBLIC PLACE".

Use some common sense. I know I do as a profressional.

 

[Jade4u]

I do use common sense and ask why anyone woud sneek pictures of a child? I can understand if it were a ball park and a parent got pictures of other children with his child. But now you are even mentioning taking pictures from afar??????? I still stand by and say the law should be changed to not allow people taking pictures of children without just cause or with questionable motives.

 

[pussylicker]

I don't understand some of you guys. I've complained about "BIG BROTHER" and cameras downtown or anywhere for that matter, and the response is usually "if you ain't doin nothin wrong, why worry?" You can be photographed anywhere, and video taped most places, and can't do a thing about it. Seems the privacy commisioner doesn't have enough pull, to get something done about all the "spying eyes".

Tboy and other's comments are right. You are in public, so you are fair game. I've been on a newscast, and the TV station never got me to sign a release before it went to air. As a spectator at an event, again newspapers will take your pic and publish without your consent

 

[tboy]

OMG Have your coffee yet this morning? I said if the behaviour is suspicious and stop and think where morons hang out is usually in groups of children in parks. Anyone who sells children or it even occurs in thier mind must be on meds.

Oh and btw I do think it is wrong just to walk up to a woman in a bikini and snap her picture without asking as well.

1) You did NOT say suspicious you said: Anyone who snaps a picture of a child should expect to have his camera busted.
2) YOU said the "child is the parent's property"....
3) You don't walk up to a woman in a bikini, You shoot while at the beach anywhere from 15 - 100 feet away. Why? Because as a photographer I like taking pictures of beautiful women, children, buildings, trees, bushes, animals, bricks, flowers, everything. I have an excellant shot of 2 elephants nuzzling each other. Does that mean I want to fuck the elephant? NO, just like if I shoot a woman in a bikini and if I shoot some kids playing in a park, I just like capturing the moment.

Seriously Jade, if THAT is how your mind works then in all seriousness, you've got some major issues that need addressing and I'd start seeing a shrink.

As for stars and paprazzi, I could never figure out why they don't wear a strobe around their neck. I mean the ones like you wear as a beacon if you fall overboard out on the lake. That would ruin any chance of any paparazzi getting a decent pic and blind em for at least a couple of seconds.....

 

[Jade4u]

There must be deeper rulings on conditions on whether or not photos are permitted or not in public places. Suspicious behaviour persay should be one.

Oh I didn't

 

[PussyHunter]

Jade4u

I'm just saying that any perv who wants to shoot pictures of kids could do it without anyone ever knowing. The equipment that is available to me as a professional is also available to them. I use my zooms when I can't get close enough to a subject or I wish to shoot something very close like a foot kicking a ball.

The number of kids that are taken from parks and public places is very minute compared to the number that are lured off the internet. When any child is abused or abducted it is a tradgety. Did your parents worry this much when your picture was taken at events and such as a child. I don't think so. Pervs where around at that time as well (check out some of the reports about the Catholic Church).

I'm not saying not to be vigulent. But unless your seeing the same character over and over again (at which point you should bring it to the authorities attention) worry about the things that matter not people who enjoy the art form.

 

[Rockslinger]

if you are in a public place, say walking down the street can people take pictures of you without your consent?

I actually asked a lawyer and the short answer to your question is YES, except in Quebec.

I also asked a TV station about them broadcasting a video of an off duty policeman beating up a cyclist and they said it is legal to take AND broadcast the video, except in Quebec. (What about a TV station taking a video with a hidden camera in Wal-Mart?)

 

[oldjones]

I actually asked a lawyer and the short answer to your question is YES, except in Quebec.

I also asked a TV station about them broadcasting a video of an off duty policeman beating up a cyclist and they said it is legal to take AND broadcast the video, except in Quebec. (What about a TV station taking a video with a hidden camera in Wal-Mart?)

They'd better have WalMart's permission in writing.