There are surveilance cameras on the public in many jurisdictions, LA and England come to mine to name two, we have it locally in Canada to patroll hookers, the privacy commisioner appears to have let it be...the right to privacy is more of a myth I think
Mike S rob wrote: >politicians are in public office... the term "public" has legal meaning. > >if u are on-duty in a "public" job (such as a politician making a speech) u >can be taped most times, because what they are saying is a matter of public >record (i'm being somewhat loose here in definition, but that's basically the >gist of it). > >most people are not in public office and have the right to privacy. if this >right didn't exist, people could film you anywhere, anytime. > >if a crowd shot is taken with no clear subject (ie: ambient) there is invasion >of privacy because no individual is being singled out... but if you took a >crowd shot, then focused in on an individual, yes, you'd need their permission >if you want to be sure you won't be sued. > >it's mostly common-sense... laws vary from country to country, but most work >along these lines. > >later >rob > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Michael Snell > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 9:27 PM > Subject: Re: [AP] permission to videotape > > > I hardly see how that can work in practical terms ...how can tv run the > news? When they shoot a crowd they have the consent of al?, when a > politician appears to make a speech...come on! > > Mike > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Adobe-Premiere/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
