DocAndersen
Ah, digital privacy. First off, I am not attacking the points made in the comment. They are correct in the statement of the laws existing today around the concept of images and who owns them. I want to point out that there are some people in public life, that would argue the reality of who owns that image is one that needs to be evaluated.
The laws were written around the appearance of a person in public. The laws loosely, I won’t go into the details, allow for the capture of images in public of people. If you are in a public place and someone takes a picture, they own that image. Again, if you ask many celebrities throughout the world, they would argue that point. I do note that this is the existing law; my posts are intended to bring up and sponsor a conversation about those laws. I have many friends who are brilliant photographers. They take amazing pictures. When the laws were created, the intent was to make it easier to capture images and share them. The reality is that the law was written at a different time. First off, no government allows embedded reporters to share all the images of a battlefield. They, the government, censor the images taken. Facebook, LinkedIn, and other social media sites reserve the right to remove any photograph they deem not meeting their ethical or moral rules. The reality is that while the photographer may own the image, sharing that picture may not be acceptable.
These laws were written roughly 10-15 years ago. They have been updated, but in fact, they are not up-to-date. My concern, my issue, and feel that my privacy is being violated comes from the reality I shared first in the last post and now expanded in this post. First of all, let me remind everyone that you are being watched. The television show “Person of Interest” started with that line at the beginning of every show. “You are being watched.” It is clear to me that my freedom is being assailed. Why? Laws written in the time of 1, 2, or even three cameras taking and keeping my image, have remained the same. But now there are a billion cell phones, thousands of selfie drones, and millions upon millions of surveillance cameras taking and keeping my image. From my house around the neighborhood we live in, and back to my house, we encounter 44 cameras. Most of those track motion so, us walking by triggers them.
It’s time for the laws to change. It is time for the never-blinking eye of Sauron we call cameras to be turned off. I do understand the reality of crime. I do understand the reality of news photography. At the time the laws were written, the concept of privacy was being protected while allowing for creativity. I do not have a problem with someone taking pictures in a public square, and my image is captured. They are welcome to that, by law. I am more concerned with the million other cameras that are capturing my image. We are being watched, and at this point, we have no voice in what the watchers are doing with the images.
There is an old saying, “Who will guard the guardians,” and it comes from Rome and the Praetorian Guard. A group that overthrew a couple of emperors and replaced them with someone else. You can look up the many posts on Virily about Roman Emperors to read more on the topic. The guardians now have legal protection in capturing and keeping images. Frankly, that violates my privacy. I think it is time to change the law about security footage to say if a crime hasn’t been committed, security footage must be deleted in 30-45 days. Selfie drones will also require modification of the laws. If you disrupt the park or outdoor experience of others with your drone, then you must cease.
I don’t want a police state. Ever. If we don’t nip the expansion of camera’s around us soon, or limit what can be done with the information soon, we are going to have a lot of police states in the world. I also see a time coming soon when my image may not be my image.
Your style is so unique compared to other people I’ve read stuff from.
i thank you for the kind words! Very nice of you to day!
I think most of us already live in what are effectively police states by some measures. The U.S. already has what is apparently the highest incarceration rate per capita and the most CCTV cameras per capita of any country in the world. That means it ranks higher than every state that would be called a police state. Many other Western democracies are not that far behind.
it is a two-sided argument. you’ve presented one side well. First off, the reality of all those CCTV cam3eras is who owns them and then the legal requirement of a subpoena to use them.
The police cannot walk into a store without a crime have been committed and ask for video from their cameras.
if the owner says no. the police are required to have a subpoena.
The reality is those millions of cameras have prevented many crimes and solved many crimes as well.
Perhaps the biggest problem is that now many cameras are networked, and anything that is on a network can be hacked. With varying degrees of difficulty admittedly.
Ah now you are getting into my world.
If you follow good security, the likelihood of hacks are less.
The vast majority of cameras are useless. Even in a situation where the video produces useful information, 90% or more of the feed is thrown away.
The biggest problem with security is, of course, the operator of the technology. The best firewalls and protections in the world don’t help if you hand the information over to someone emailing/ringing you.
Yes, that magical “enhance button” so favoured of crime shows does not exist. If the data isn’t there, it isn’t there.
there is always the risk in the world.
i do think security continues to improve. But the issue is that it isn’t a set and forget it is an ongoing process.
If I ever saw you do I have permission to take your picture lol. Very interesting post!
yes, you have permission to take my pictures should our path’s ever cross!
Very interesting article, Doc. We lost our privacy years ago.
we could argue that there is another side.
Recently there was a terrorist attack in the US (in FL) the FBI still hasn’t been able to open or access the shooter’s phone.
there is still privacy in the world.
In this age, privacy no longer matters anymore. With our smart phones we’re still being surveyed. How we shop, which things we like to search on the internet, what we do and where we live. These electronic devices are useful but they can be abused.
as I said above, the authorities cannot open your phone. If your phone gets hacked, that is on your for the bad security.
but if you do something, the authorities don’t have a back door into your phone. That may change someday but for now, we still have some personal privacy.
I like it in your country there is the permission required. I am not so sure of the authorities over here. Privacy in this part of the world sounds strange including my neighboring country.
they don’t make the phones or the phone OS, so it doesn’t amtter!
Yah, you are right. They have to ask for permission. I had overlook it.
There has been an international push to get access to phones. It scares me, not because the companies are saying no, its that governments are willing to say the rights of one, do not equal the safety of many.
I didn’t know that. When it reaches that point, we are better off robots than humans. They will be invading our privacy and will find out ways to control us more easily.
It reminds me of the Kenyan government which was forcing the citizens to register their information biometrically. They succeeded through threatening but they had gone overboard to include GPS and DNA for everyone but were stopped by the court.
that is interesting, and of course a little scary.
The police in the US are now submitting DNA data to Ancestry and 23 and me. It allows them to catch criminals based on DHA.
Yah, through DNA it is easier to catch criminals but I would never trust my government with it.
your government, my government already has DNA. If you commit a crime and are convicted your right to DNA is taken.
In the US law enforcement gets a subpoena and then submits a sample to 23 and me or ancestry.
So very true and they all call it progress but where are we progressing to? I started writing online in the early 2000s now when I Google my own name I am amazed at all the pops up. It is like I have made my home online.
that becomes an interesting conversation – what part of you is really online?
The best way I could respond is Google my name Rasma Raisters and take a look and then you can tell me what you think, Doc. I don’t mind being famous it makes things very interesting.
it is certainly interesting what you’ve done. i google my name on occasion (me personally and my user name).
fame is fleeting.
clearly nobody is watching the watchmen
who will guard the guardians?
The FBI would like the right to open a criminal’s iPhone.
Apple said no.
is this the same apple that got sued for listening to siri users?
Amazon and Google did the same thing.
The reality of voice control systems is they have to improve.
but yes the simple answer is that Apple got sued for that.
still isn’t a backdoor to their os though…
yeah. the FBI is always asking for that, guess they don’t get tired of being told NO
my gut is there are other things going on.
i’ll stop there.
Very interesting thoughts! We are facing new challenges the more we develop.
Freedom becomes an interesting word, then doesn’t it.
my argument is that today, we still have privacy (Apple refused to open a labeled terrorist iPhone in the US for the FBI)
Does Apple have the ability to do so? did they embed a backdoor?
if they put a back door in, we have no privacy. If as they have publically there is no back door, we have privacy still.
It is a very complex issue, but I don’t feel these companies are as transparent as they like to appear.
that is the essence of both sides of that argument!
Apple says we won’t do it, we cannot sacrifice the freedoms of our users.
The government says the person has committed a heinous crime, therefore, doesn’t deserve protection from their personal freedoms.
I think there has to be a middle ground.
Sometimes governments make very unusual laws and regulations.
yes they do and it becomes interesting the more they do.
Big Brother is always watching. Two years ago and still today.
in fact it is, thanks CaroL~~~
Great and interesting post , thank you
you are most welcome thanks for stopping by
You said it right! I often take pictures of the ocean, well I cannot tell people to MOVE over and let me snap my photos! Every store you walk into, smile your on camera. every telephone pole has a camera on top and if need be the police or any agency can tap that line and watch a house, who comes and goes.
But as for me and my camera I will keep snapping photos as long as I am allowed.
that becomes the interesting question doesn’t it, and of course something we still have to contend with!
I know rights to what is considered personal privacy vary greatly from country to country.
Unless I am in, or dealing with one whose human rights are appalling or non-existent, at least for the common man… or should that now be person? I do not tend to consider them too much.
After reading this that could be considered naive, but I am of the opinion that personal privacy is actually only an illusion now.
All of our details are ‘out there’ somewhere, if not everywhere. I believe that your own country has your details stored away, right down to the colour of your underwear. This is also a higher probability intimate knowledge of your life is on the databases of Russian, North Korean and Chinese computers.
BUT that is the least of your worries. Because everything the assorted governments know about you pale into insignificance compared to the web of within the global corporate world.
So, who has my image, my works, my health records and sexual preferences… truth is, I no longer care… and that is the key for the common man whose image is not a marketing tool. If you don’t care, there is no power or mileage it who knows or sees. It’s a ‘Publish and be damned’ scenario.
I do not mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist.. just airing a point of view!
i think in the 2 years since I published this – the interesting reality is everything is as it was. no change.
Very interesting post, DocAndersen. Thank you.
thank you very much for the comment, my apologies for missing this!