Right to photograph in public spaces-USA

[reallifenow]

Came across this link that applies to USA only. It is your First Amendment right to photograph in public. This might be useful to have a copy of this in your camera bag...
Sorry if this is a repeat posting but I think it is worth a reminder....

http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/know-your-rights-photographers

[Jay DeFehr]

Is it possible for images/video to be automatically/instantly uploaded to the cloud? That might make snatching cameras and deleting files less appealing to law enforcement, since that activity might also be recorded. I'm very grateful for the ACLU.

[cyrus]

Is it possible for images/video to be automatically/instantly uploaded to the cloud? That might make snatching cameras and deleting files less appealing to law enforcement, since that activity might also be recorded. I'm very grateful for the ACLU.

Sure if you're using a digital cellphone camera - with a click you can upload it to facebook if you want.

[Steve Smith]

It's practically the same for us in the UK (except for the bits about trespass). Here is a UK version: http://www.sirimo.co.uk/2009/05/14/u...ers-rights-v2/


Steve.

[Kirk Gittings]

Keep this in your camera bag? OK but......understand that this document is a legal interpretation of your rights by the ACLU. While I happen to agree with their opinion here, a police officer may have a different interpretation and showing him an opinion by the ACLU may not be very convincing.

[cyrus]

None of what the ACLU has written here is particularly controversial - it is pretty standard stuff. It really isn't open to interpretation (to the extent that anything legal is deemed to be well-established.) THe problem is that there are certain practical considerations. The cop has the option of simply ignoring the law, requiring you to eventually go to court to prove that they were wrong. For example the Ny - NJ Path system prohibits public photography even though the courts have ruled that their stations are "public" (a lawsuit that I am pursuing.) Cops simply say that they have to follow the rules as they're instructed to do, even though it may be legally "wrong." In the meantime, while you're proving them wrong, you're not taking photos that you're perfectly entitled to take.

[Jay DeFehr]

Cyrus,

I was wondering about the automatic/instantaneous part. Is it possible to save all files to the cloud simultaneously with saving them to a memory card, for instance?

[Roger Cole]

None of what the ACLU has written here is particularly controversial - it is pretty standard stuff. It really isn't open to interpretation (to the extent that anything legal is deemed to be well-established.) THe problem is that there are certain practical considerations. The cop has the option of simply ignoring the law, requiring you to eventually go to court to prove that they were wrong. For example the Ny - NJ Path system prohibits public photography even though the courts have ruled that their stations are "public" (a lawsuit that I am pursuing.) Cops simply say that they have to follow the rules as they're instructed to do, even though it may be legally "wrong." In the meantime, while you're proving them wrong, you're not taking photos that you're perfectly entitled to take.

Good luck with the suit. We need more people to do that and not just roll over and move along with no photos and a shrug.

[D. Bryant]

Cyrus,

I was wondering about the automatic/instantaneous part. Is it possible to save all files to the cloud simultaneously with saving them to a memory card, for instance?

Probably not.

[Jay DeFehr]

Probably not.

I'm not a programmer, but it seems technically possible, and so inevitable, if not currently available. The security applications are obvious, creating a kind of black box for video security systems, etc. It would also be useful for all kinds of reporting, and especially reporting from non-secure/ hostile environments.

I think cloud computing is another paradigm shift, within the larger digital one. I've noticed movie plots now have to make allowances for characters not using internet/ cell phones when any real person would naturally do so. Movie criminals are losing so many of their time honored tactics, like shooting out security cameras, removing security video tapes, calling from phone booths, speaking just long enough for their phone calls to not be traceable, etc, etc. These problems and others like them are particularly sticky when remaking a classic film. More often than not the audience is simply expected to ignore the incongruities, which is perhaps a more elegant solution than creating a ruse to address them. Off topic, I know, my apologies.

[D. Bryant]

I'm not a programmer, but it seems technically possible, and so inevitable, if not currently available.

Perhaps you are referencing a device like this:

http://www.eye.fi/how-it-works/basics

That works if you have an intermediary device like a droid, iphone or ipad. Of course that device has to have connectivity and bandwidth to accomplish the task efficiently.

[Jay DeFehr]

Yes! Something just like that. Imagine the implications!

[gbogatko]

I like the part about:

your Eye-Fi card can directly transfer photos and videos from your camera to your iPhone, iPad, or Android device.

Shoot with the camera -- the image automatically transfers to to the other device -- perhaps in the pocket of your friend standing 10-20 feet away. Cop takes the camera (and other stupid things). Your friend saunters off. (... and let's not get into the wiretap stuff -- in "one party consent" states, you're in the clear.)

I have this daydream of getting some people together and "going hunting" for goons like this, then suing them. Enough 10 - 30 thousand payouts and the message might get across.

[D. Bryant]

I like the part about:

your Eye-Fi card can directly transfer photos and videos from your camera to your iPhone, iPad, or Android device.

Shoot with the camera -- the image automatically transfers to to the other device -- perhaps in the pocket of your friend standing 10-20 feet away.

Nope the Eye-Fi card is linked to a specific device, not someone else's.

[jp]

The eye-fi card would be easiest. Nikon and probably Canon also make wifi transmitters for their pro cameras. Some of the pro Nikons have two cards slots as well, so you could "hand over your card" and still have a second copy in the camera's other memory slot.

The wifi could beam to the afformentioned ipad/tablet on someone else. That could use a cell connection to save them to some sort of cloud based storage. My android phone can be a wifi access point, but the phone internet isn't super fast. It does have memory card slot though, so it could save the files locally and be on someone other than the photographer.

For the programmer type, a third person could intercept the unencrypted wifi and save it with wireshark on their portable computer. wireshark capture files can be later reconstructed to easily resurrect images, voip traffic, web traffic, etc... I do this on a regular basis (capturing with wireshark) to troubleshoot network issues on my private network, evaluate security of systems I manage, etc...

The "cloud" doesn't provide anonymity. It just means someone will need to get multiple subpoenas written up to find out where the data actually is. Cloud security is a real concern, with random people all over the world using a computing resource, so cloud providers keep real good logs and backups in general for security and reliability reasons.

[gbogatko]

Nope the Eye-Fi card is linked to a specific device

... which is in the pocket of your friend standing 10 - 20 feet away ..... :)