4 ms·

Note that in, for instance, Spain and in public this would not be allowed without permission of the people you are photographing or filming. Depending on the c

Note that in, for instance, Spain and in public this would not be allowed without permission of the people you are photographing or filming. Depending on the case, the fines are quite out there. So you can demand people from not filming you in public spaces, deleting the recordings or get the police involved. Not that many people do, but I have seen it happen. Seems France has similar rules so probably more countries.

aa-jv 4y ago
There are some nuances to this law - you can take peoples photos if they are in the way of your landscape/panorama/something else you are attempting to photograph. You need their permission to publish it, however. I personally don't agree with the Spaniards on this position. Its also illegal to photograph police in Spain - this is not a law I agree with one bit. Public officials should be public, always.
- geoduck14 4y ago
  >Public officials should be public, always. By and large, I agree with the sentiment that "we should be allowed to video cops", but public officials includes people like the DMV - those people should be allowed privacy when they aren't doing their job.
  - aa-jv 4y ago
    I don't agree. Public officials should be able to operate in the public. If they can't, they're not qualified for the job. Too many times our public positions are occupied by bureaucrats who would wither at any oversight of their work. If you work in the public interest, expect public attention.
- tluyben2 4y ago
  I am against not filming the police and indeed it makes injustice happen. Seems not as rife as the US, however that might be because it is less reported, I do not know. I think police should at least have functional body cams at all times, by law and if they did not function at a moment of a crime, they should have to explain that or get fined or fired depending. Watching American shows about police with bodycams and citizens filming makes me more convinced that that at least should be allowed.
thehappypm 4y ago
Europeans are not used to the level of freedoms that Americans have, and Americans should not be eager to give them up.
- tluyben2 4y ago
  Meaning? I can video anyone and be filmed by anyone (which I am against outside crimes in actual progress) except if it’s my underage kids having fun splattering around in the pool, I go to jail for kiddy porn in the US even though that’s normal here? It’s not sexual and all parents do it here to remember the good times. Different definitions of freedom. More (innocent) people in prison (also on pre trial) than anywhere else also seems not freedom to me. Having to carry a gun to protect myself also seems further away from freedom even though that seems to be the ultimate idea of freedom for some over there. With cheap AI involved, most things with cameras seems really the opposite of freedom to me. We create a virtual prison where we are tracked by 1000s of cameras (on phones or buildings) and we can only get out by going into the jungle or desert. I don’t want to be filmed or photographed by anyone in public or private and I get most stuff kicked off social media easily because the data protection laws of the EU, which I like, if I did not give consent; but I am against that it is illegal in some countries to record the police. They need to be held accountable. I like it very much that the streets here are not littered (there are 0 where I live) with cams ‘against terrorism’ or what not; that is more important freedom for me.
- jfengel 4y ago
  Which freedom do you mean here? The freedom to record everything you see, or the freedom to expect at least some privacy even in public (which people believed they had before cameras, and automated tools for analyzing and spreading the image, became ubiquitous)? Practically every freedom is infringing on somebody else's freedom. We should not be eager to assume that some specific freedom we treasure does not impose a restriction on somebody else. It's rarely a straightforward moral absolute. We balance conflicting rights all the time.
jaclaz 4y ago
In Italy the Law is different, AFAIK there are no prohibitions on filming in public (be the target ordinary people or police/law officers) the limitations come into place when/if you want to "diffuse" the filmed material (i.e. post the video on social, youtube and similar), you need either an authorization[1] from the people filmed or you need to make them not recognizable (i.e. pixelate/obfuscate their faces and/or other recognizable areas). I believe there are some exceptions, like public gatherings and similar and the purpose for which the video is published/made available but I think it is a fine line to walk on. From what I understand about this specific device, the whole idea circles around Meta/Facebook (i.e. to publish the taken videos) and from a legal viewpoint it is likely to open a large can of worms. [1] this takes the form - in theory - of a signed declaration by the subject including name, surname, address, etc. all "sensible data", I don't think anyone has ever done this outside professional filming

aa-jv 4y ago

There are some nuances to this law - you can take peoples photos if they are in the way of your landscape/panorama/something else you are attempting to photograph. You need their permission to publish it, however. I personally don't agree with the Spaniards on this position. Its also illegal to photograph police in Spain - this is not a law I agree with one bit. Public officials should be public, always.

geoduck14 4y ago
>Public officials should be public, always. By and large, I agree with the sentiment that "we should be allowed to video cops", but public officials includes people like the DMV - those people should be allowed privacy when they aren't doing their job.
- aa-jv 4y ago
  I don't agree. Public officials should be able to operate in the public. If they can't, they're not qualified for the job. Too many times our public positions are occupied by bureaucrats who would wither at any oversight of their work. If you work in the public interest, expect public attention.
tluyben2 4y ago
I am against not filming the police and indeed it makes injustice happen. Seems not as rife as the US, however that might be because it is less reported, I do not know. I think police should at least have functional body cams at all times, by law and if they did not function at a moment of a crime, they should have to explain that or get fined or fired depending. Watching American shows about police with bodycams and citizens filming makes me more convinced that that at least should be allowed.

thehappypm 4y ago

Europeans are not used to the level of freedoms that Americans have, and Americans should not be eager to give them up.

tluyben2 4y ago
Meaning? I can video anyone and be filmed by anyone (which I am against outside crimes in actual progress) except if it’s my underage kids having fun splattering around in the pool, I go to jail for kiddy porn in the US even though that’s normal here? It’s not sexual and all parents do it here to remember the good times. Different definitions of freedom. More (innocent) people in prison (also on pre trial) than anywhere else also seems not freedom to me. Having to carry a gun to protect myself also seems further away from freedom even though that seems to be the ultimate idea of freedom for some over there. With cheap AI involved, most things with cameras seems really the opposite of freedom to me. We create a virtual prison where we are tracked by 1000s of cameras (on phones or buildings) and we can only get out by going into the jungle or desert. I don’t want to be filmed or photographed by anyone in public or private and I get most stuff kicked off social media easily because the data protection laws of the EU, which I like, if I did not give consent; but I am against that it is illegal in some countries to record the police. They need to be held accountable. I like it very much that the streets here are not littered (there are 0 where I live) with cams ‘against terrorism’ or what not; that is more important freedom for me.
jfengel 4y ago
Which freedom do you mean here? The freedom to record everything you see, or the freedom to expect at least some privacy even in public (which people believed they had before cameras, and automated tools for analyzing and spreading the image, became ubiquitous)? Practically every freedom is infringing on somebody else's freedom. We should not be eager to assume that some specific freedom we treasure does not impose a restriction on somebody else. It's rarely a straightforward moral absolute. We balance conflicting rights all the time.

jaclaz 4y ago

In Italy the Law is different, AFAIK there are no prohibitions on filming in public (be the target ordinary people or police/law officers) the limitations come into place when/if you want to "diffuse" the filmed material (i.e. post the video on social, youtube and similar), you need either an authorization[1] from the people filmed or you need to make them not recognizable (i.e. pixelate/obfuscate their faces and/or other recognizable areas). I believe there are some exceptions, like public gatherings and similar and the purpose for which the video is published/made available but I think it is a fine line to walk on. From what I understand about this specific device, the whole idea circles around Meta/Facebook (i.e. to publish the taken videos) and from a legal viewpoint it is likely to open a large can of worms. [1] this takes the form - in theory - of a signed declaration by the subject including name, surname, address, etc. all "sensible data", I don't think anyone has ever done this outside professional filming