Rights - in a Public Place

[wgerrard]

As with everything, much depends upon intent. When government watches me, I do not presume it is purely for my own good. But I am paranoid, aye.

While keeping our wits about us is wise, I trust corporate power, and cameras, considerably less than government power and cameras.

But, I still don't get riled when I spot a CCTV camera pointed at me. A budding street picture taker with a camera twice his age, however, just might get a reaction if he got too close. My right to get annoyed is as real as his right to take that photo.

 

[bmattock]

And so it goes. To each, his poison.

 

[arbib]

I knew this thread would get a lot of reaction..

Next time you see a CCTV Cam aimed at you....Aim your Cam right back and snap away !!....

 

[Sparrow]

Just a few random observations

I read 1984 while at school, mock O level English Lit I think, the masters and teachers were anything but liberal Orwell was definitely not flavour of the month. However even based on their analysis of the book, they, a bunch of rightwing reactionaries, fresh from a world war and having lived under the Defence of the Realm Act, would if alive today, be astonished at the shift in public attitude to surveillance both private and state sponsored.

The public photography I can do is tiny when compared to what the state can achieve, and I have no way to collate or cross-check my photos whereas the state collects all types of other information and has a more complete picture than I could ever get, I can’t put names to faces but they can. Now despite this it is my actions are thought suspicious and not theirs, I find that odd in the extreme

If the public attitude shifts enough eventually Bill’s irate mother will end up in court, in the UK if there is no statute law and no precedent exists then likely as not it would be decided by public opinion at the time, what if the Sun takes the mother’s side?

Rant over, normal service is resumed

Regards

 

[Kevin]

Excuse me but you are somehow strangely confused and distracted. Celebrities exist to make it more difficult for you to notice and evaluate the REAL movers and shakers in this world. Celebrities are products (like Hubba Bubba bubble gum or the Leica M6) that are marketed by their owners. Get yourself together, man, and stop believing these people are role-models and heros.

I year or two back I was wondering around Bondi Beach Sydney with my wife one evening and when I looked around there seated at a restaurant window seat was Nicole Kidman. She was in full view of the public and as I understand Australian privacy law (such as it is ) I could have pulled out my camera and photographed her. But I am not a paparazzo and did not wish to intrude.

I think I had the right to photograph her had I wanted to, but another factor to consider was that this restaurant attracts celebs (I had seen George Lucas the filmmaker there a few months before) and I could imagine the owner wanting to protect his high profile clientele's privacy so I was not inclined to push the matter - besides I figure its one thing to photograph a bunch of ordinary people in a restaurant because its a nice composition and entirely another to intrude on someones otherwise private moment simply because they are a celebrity.

In short I guess what I am saying is that there is an element of personal discretion involved no matter what the legal rights and wrongs.

Funny aside. My wife would not believe that I had seen Nicole Kidman and refused to even turn around to look (she had already walked past without noticing.) It was only when she saw her photo and a short article in the local paper the next day that she agreed to eat humble pie.