INDYSTAR.com: "Congress Takes Aim at Digital Peepers"

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.indystar.com/articles/2/135097-9362-010.html' target='_blank'>http://www.indystar.com/articles/2/135097-9362-010.html</a><br /><br /></div>"Congress is aiming to punish digital-age peeping Toms who secretly snoop on people with cell-phone cameras and other high-tech gadgets. Lawmakers say a growing trend of video voyeurism threatens personal privacy and dignity in an era when indecent images can be beamed onto the Internet in seconds with tiny, low-cost cameras. Legislation moving through Congress would make it a federal crime to surreptitiously film, videotape or photograph unsuspecting people in places like locker rooms and public bathrooms..."<br /><br />I'm not a big believer in the legal system being able to solve issues around technology, because technology will always out-pace the laws - yet somehow the idea of it being legal for someone to use a cameraphone in a changing room seems wrong. I'm not overly familiar with US laws in this regard, but I believe they allow your photo to be taken if you're in a public place. But that means that unless you're on your own property, <i>everything</i> else is fair game. I don't know how this jives with model release forms though - when I was writing articles for Microsoft's PocketPC.com site and I had a picture of someone on the Pocket PC screen, MS legal required a model release form before they'd publish the image. So is taking the photos legal, but publishing them illegal without a model release form?

[Neil Enns]

I think you posted a link to this once before, but check out The Photographer's Rights (http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm). It's actually a bit too vague for me, but it does say that in general you can take photos in public places, but private places require permission.

The tricky part is state laws which, unfortunately, vary by state. In California they have a specific law about taking pictures in public places that are clearly of a specific person for profit. That leads to the whole model release business.

Neil

[Doug Johnson]

I've always heard that the general rule of thumb is that if the picture is being used for commercial, non-documentary type use (newsgathering, etc) you'll need a model release. Or if you are taking the picture in a private setting, you need permission from the property owner, plus a model release if it is commercial.