4 ms·

> I install a whiteboard on a public place You're already off. This was private property. > and say to everyone, "please have a test" then can you complain if

> I install a whiteboard on a public place You're already off. This was private property. > and say to everyone, "please have a test" then can you complain if someone draw something you don't like on it This would be more like bolting a camera to the whiteboard in your private place of business. And yes, sometimes comparisons fall apart.

simion314 5y ago
I think a place can be private property and at the same time a public place(not a public property) , but I am not a native English speaker so maybe this terms are not equivalent. But image the whiteboard was in a mall that is not owned by the government and people are encouraged to use it as they want. I agree that publishing those images of poeple without consent is the important part, the guy could have just use the browser and use some video chat app bypassing the install an applet part(probably this tech was not ready at that time). Still this issue is not something for NSA or other 3 letter agency to get involved in. In fact if this issue would have been handled by the normal procedure it might have be resolved with some punishment for the guy, but involving the big agency backfired.
- angry_octet 5y ago
  You are correct, private property can be a public place. Stores are a definite example of this. Many people get very confused by what Private Property! means. By inviting the public into their store they have waived the requirement to have privacy in that space, unless they specifically inform you that photography is not allowed. The irony is that the visitors to the store can have no expectation of privacy. Even if you wear a giant sign that says 'no photos' you can and will be photographed. Publishing photos of specific individuals is more nuanced. It depends on the jurisdiction, if it is for news, artistic or commercial purposes (the latter is usually forbidden without written consent).

simion314 5y ago

I think a place can be private property and at the same time a public place(not a public property) , but I am not a native English speaker so maybe this terms are not equivalent. But image the whiteboard was in a mall that is not owned by the government and people are encouraged to use it as they want. I agree that publishing those images of poeple without consent is the important part, the guy could have just use the browser and use some video chat app bypassing the install an applet part(probably this tech was not ready at that time). Still this issue is not something for NSA or other 3 letter agency to get involved in. In fact if this issue would have been handled by the normal procedure it might have be resolved with some punishment for the guy, but involving the big agency backfired.

angry_octet 5y ago
You are correct, private property can be a public place. Stores are a definite example of this. Many people get very confused by what Private Property! means. By inviting the public into their store they have waived the requirement to have privacy in that space, unless they specifically inform you that photography is not allowed. The irony is that the visitors to the store can have no expectation of privacy. Even if you wear a giant sign that says 'no photos' you can and will be photographed. Publishing photos of specific individuals is more nuanced. It depends on the jurisdiction, if it is for news, artistic or commercial purposes (the latter is usually forbidden without written consent).