Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,273   Posts: 1,534,569   Online: 1020
      
Page 1 of 10 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 94
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    463
    Images
    6

    Video Voyeurism Prevention Act of 2004

    This latest stupidy, coupled with the Homeland Stupidity Act put all of us in the USA in danger. Tourists, street photographers, LF architectural/scenic shooters & anyone with a camera. All are at the mercy of the paranoid idiots with badges. No pretext is too small for them to stop & harass you. Photograph the subway, power lines or a normal street scene & you might find yourself subject to arrest. All it takes on one bad cop... and there are a hell of a lot more than one of them out there. Welcome to the USASSR

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    463
    Images
    6
    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.+1301:

    The above should get you to the copy of this US act.
    Note the language... you can even get in trouble for drawing the wrong thing in public.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,530
    LOL....why are you so upset? These are your representatives in congress at work....This is certainly far more important than providing medical care for indigent children, making sure social security does not go bankrupt (which btw I imagine they are going to borrow from the SS fund to enforce this law). So really, this is truly a threat to the US. Now, if you take pictures of your children in the bath tub, you are a child pornographer in violation of the video voyeurism law.....lol....this amuses me to no end.....

  4. #4
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    Did you take the time to read said bill? I personally think it is about time something like this is stated. What in essence it says is that no can take a picture image, video or any sort of image capture of private parts of an individual without their knowledge. It goes further to also state that transmission of said image capture of any sort is not going to be allowed.

    Short version, if you take a picture of someone with their private parts hanging out, you had better have their written conscent. To take it without their permission, is illegal. To put it on any sort of medium that transmits it for others to see, is illegal.

    I do not see a darn thing wrong with getting permission. Do you want someone to take a picture you you naked and post it? All without your conscent or knowledge?
    Non Digital Diva

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Jungleland, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    87
    Images
    2
    This is nothing more than what has been needed. A law to prosecute doosh bags who walk around the mall with a video camera on the end of a cane or their shoe. Up until recently the law was on their side because there is no "assumption of privacy" in public areas. This is intended to keep my private parts, well, private. As the father of a little girl I welcome it. The defenitions are pretty clear.They will work in the best interest of the general public.
    The Rat

  6. #6
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Interesting law.

    Chapter 88 - Video Voyeurism
    1801, Section (c) -

    - This section shall not apply to any person engaged in lawful law enforcement (? does this sound redundant? - ES) or intelligence activities.


    - So if you are an Intelligence Operative, it is perfectly OK to place a video camera in the Ladies rest facilities ... "gathering intelligence."???
    Does this sound like "licensed perversion -- "Licensed licentiousness" -- to anyone else? What possible intelligence value could there be in ladies "undergarments"? Or the size of ... no... I won't go there ..

    One change in my Modus Operandi ... and I'll suggest the same to others that do figure studies ... Get the Model Release signed before the session, or introduce some other sort of "Consent Form".
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  7. #7
    juan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    St. Simons Island, Georgia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,637
    Images
    4
    As I understand it, the cell-phone digital camera idiots prompted this law. They were taking photos of women in gyms and other such places and then emailing them or uploading them. I think, rather than the Video Voyerism law, we need one simply authorizing us to shoot people doing such stuff, and also shoot people who are talking on a cell phone while driving.
    juan

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Jungleland, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    87
    Images
    2
    In order to test the possibility of abuse in any law we have to imagine the most extreme scenario. Doubtful that any arbitrary photography of me in a restroom, where I have an assumtion of privacy, would stand up in court if not tied to a legitimate investigation of ME. If, for instance, a woman was smuggling heroin to her boyfriend in prison, or somone was hiding evidence in their pants, I can see where this type of photography would be a necessary evidence gathering tool. Once again, this law is meant for the losers we must coexist with in society. Embrace your freedom and go photograph telephone poles or people in the street. Just keep your phone in it's holster in the locker room.
    The Rat

  9. #9
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggie
    Short version, if you take a picture of someone with their private parts hanging out, you had better have their written conscent. To take it without their permission, is illegal. To put it on any sort of medium that transmits it for others to see, is illegal.

    I do not see a darn thing wrong with getting permission. Do you want someone to take a picture you you naked and post it? All without your conscent or knowledge?
    So how do proud parents get permission from their newborn babe to get a shot of him/her in the tub? It effectively outlaws ALL beach/holiday photography because there might be someone in the background with 'private parts' on show, it outlaws photographing your own kids while playing in a pool or with the hose in the garden... I have absolutely no wish to photograph anyone's 'private parts', but I do wish to be able to photograph without some slackjaw pointing an accusatory finger at me as a possible pervert.

    This act is politically correct madness with serious repercussions for all US photographers. Even totalitarian Russia had no law like this.

    And before you say it is no concern of mine, as a UK citizen what happens in the US usually happens here within a short time.


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    701
    How do you photograph your kids in the tub? You point the camera and take the photo. If your kids later sue you for damages then you must have done something wrong somewhere, something that had nothing to do with taking pictures of their naked behind in the tub.

    At the beach or in a pool? Swimsuits are not considered undergarments.

    The law is very specific in what is being targeted.

Page 1 of 10 1234567 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin