Question About People Taking Pictures of You

[jwbryson1]

If I were the OP, I would have just walked up to the photographer and said look, Schwettylens, I get that you like to take pics and all but would you mind not taking any more of me? I'm having a "bad hair day." Thanks, Schwett man! (C'mon, I kid!)

:smileys:

 

[tirediron]

If I were the OP, I would have just walked up to the photographer and said look, Schwettylens, I get that you like to take pics and all but would you mind not taking any more of me? I'm having a "bad hair day." Thanks, Schwett man! (C'mon, I kid!)

:smileys:

 

[bhop]

Because she was in a public place. She simply had no expectation of privacy.

First of all, she was NOT in a public place, she was in publicly accessible private property. NOT the same thing at all. Being a curious person by nature, I took a few minutes of my lunch-hour to look further into it (and note: I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one television), and it seems that there are a couple of potential precidents in Canadian law regarding violation of the reasonable expectation of privacy that could apply depending on the type of venue.

You're right, it's not the same, but from what I understand of the way things work down here, the photography laws on private property are set by the property owners. Maybe it's different there, or maybe i'm completely wrong, I dunno.. and I plan to use my lunch break to eat lunch, so maybe i'll never know.

At this point, I don't really care anymore, or care to have an internet argument about it, since it seems the OP is gone and i'll never find out why she was so upset at a simple photo or what she thought the dude might've done with it anyway.

 

[HughGuessWho]

I agree it's fiction too, as I stated yesterday. The facts, as told, just don't add up.

 

[HughGuessWho]

Unfortunately Vixxen, you are out of luck. As distasteful and innapropriate as this person was being, he did nothing illegal. The Canadian law(s) as they apply are:

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states that: "You are guaranteed the right to take photographs, and publish them. You are guaranteed the right to express yourself through photography, and you have the freedom to publish the photos you take. Unless you are arrested, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees your right to take photographs of anything you want, as well as publish them."

The only statues (of which I am aware) which supercede this are contained in the Canadian Criminal Code as follows: Reasonable Expectation of Privacy: The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms also says that every Canadian is guaranteed a reasonable expectation of privacy. This protects your privacy against unreasonable search, and seizure of your property by the government. For non-government related privacy, see Criminal Voyeurism, and the various Privacy Acts for your Province, they protect your privacy from other people and companies, as well, they protect the privacy of people you photograph."

and

"Criminal Voyeurism You can not take photos of people who are in circumstances where they believe that they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, for example, a bathroom. This generally extends to include a person inside their own home, or anywhere where they have reason to believe is a private place."

Since you would be hard-pressed to make either one of these apply in this situation, your only option is to complain to the management, who, as the property owners, or representiatives thereof, can authorize or forbid the taking of photographs within their premises.

From Yesterday

I'm Done. Over 'n Out

 

[bhop]

Unfortunately Vixxen, you are out of luck. As distasteful and innapropriate as this person was being, he did nothing illegal. The Canadian law(s) as they apply are:

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states that: "You are guaranteed the right to take photographs, and publish them. You are guaranteed the right to express yourself through photography, and you have the freedom to publish the photos you take. Unless you are arrested, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees your right to take photographs of anything you want, as well as publish them."

The only statues (of which I am aware) which supercede this are contained in the Canadian Criminal Code as follows: Reasonable Expectation of Privacy: The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms also says that every Canadian is guaranteed a reasonable expectation of privacy. This protects your privacy against unreasonable search, and seizure of your property by the government. For non-government related privacy, see Criminal Voyeurism, and the various Privacy Acts for your Province, they protect your privacy from other people and companies, as well, they protect the privacy of people you photograph."

and

"Criminal Voyeurism You can not take photos of people who are in circumstances where they believe that they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, for example, a bathroom. This generally extends to include a person inside their own home, or anywhere where they have reason to believe is a private place."

Since you would be hard-pressed to make either one of these apply in this situation, your only option is to complain to the management, who, as the property owners, or representiatives thereof, can authorize or forbid the taking of photographs within their premises.

From Yesterday

I'm Done. Over 'n Out

Wow, tirediron was bustin' my balls after he'd posted that?

 

[The_Traveler]

On the other hand, I was in a local library and caught the librarian trying to sneak a shot up the leg of my pants.
She smirked at me, told me she heard I went 'commando' and smirked again - even more lewdly.
I jumped across the table, took my library card (which I keep honed to a fine edge) and slashed her bun right off.
Of course she yelled for security but when they came (two 16 year old girls, one in a mini skirt and a tube top, the other in halter and shorts) I explained how I had been abused.
Well, they took her out back and beat the crap out of her.
In compensation, I can keep my books out for three weeks instead of two and she had to pay my book fines for a year.
That showed that *****.

 

[tirediron]

Wow, tirediron was bustin' my balls after he'd posted that?

That was my initial thought, however as is often the case, further research seemed to indicate that the situation was not so clear-cut. Even I can sometimes get it wrong!

 

[Josh66]

Of course she yelled for security but when they came (two 16 year old girls, one in a mini skirt and a tube top, the other in halter and shorts) I explained how I had been abused.
[...]
That showed that *****.

I hope she also got fired for yelling in the library. Damn *****...

 

[bhop]

Wow, tirediron was bustin' my balls after he'd posted that?

That was my initial thought, however as is often the case, further research seemed to indicate that the situation was not so clear-cut. Even I can sometimes get it wrong!

No hard feelings.