RSS
Twitter
Fines And A Destroyed Phone For A Topless Cameraphone Snap Shot
from the details-please? dept
Rather than banning camera phones outright, we're always suggesting that the focus be on criminal acts done via the phone -- so it at first seems encouraging to find out that a man in Australia has been fined for taking camera phone photos of a topless woman. However, there are some things that are not entirely clear from the story. Apparently, the man took the photo at the beach -- but it's unclear what the situation was under which the photo was taken. If the woman were just lying topless on the beach, a public place, where any expectation of privacy doesn't exist, it's hard to see how this is a problem. Assuming she was just sitting there, for any passerby to see her topless, then how is it a violation for the guy to take her picture? Lots of people in public places have their photos taken all the time, and it's not considered a violation of privacy. Because this woman decides to take her shirt off, it's suddenly a violation? If there's more to the story (such as the fact that she was in a changing room, or something along those lines), then this interpretation might change, but otherwise, it's tough to see what the big deal is. Also, at the end of the story, it's noted that the guy's phone will be destroyed. Talk about irrational acts. This isn't a dog who bit someone. It's a phone. It's owner took the photo, why should the phone be destroyed? What's to stop the guy from getting another camera phone? Also, since the point of most camera phones is to take a photo and move it somewhere off the phone, you have to wonder if "destroying the phone" actually destroyed the picture in question.
Reader Comments
(Flattened / Threaded)
Deterrence
Maybe if the guy realizes he's going to have to pay for a new phone every time he takes a picture of a topless woman, he might think twice about doing it again. Camera phones ain't cheap, y'know...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Deterrence
Hmm. That's a bit like nation-building by bombing the hell out of it.
No, there seems to be a chance that the phot-snapping incident was innocent, and that the guy couldn't have reasonably predicted the outcome. What kind of deterrent will be established by randomly damaging camera phones?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Deterrence
There's no justice like angry mob justice.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Deterrence
Local news in Australia reported that the judge ordered the phone to be returned to its owner, but the owner declined and asked the police to destroy it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Insurance
I guess some companies will start selling insurance for your phone now.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Insurance
They already do:
http://www.lockline.com/
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Destroying Isn't New
If you think about it, it's not much different than police impounding cars used in drug deals. The cars didn't do anything wrong, and these people can buy a new car, but it's another tactic to discourage the crime.
However, I agree that this is probably overkill in this case. Confiscating a user's property should be saved for serious crimes and criminals. Unless the guy had a record of voyeurism or they found other inappropriately taken topless photos on the phone, he should probably get his phone back.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Destroying Isn't New
You know, if the police impounded cars used to break traffic laws, even on the first offence, I bet a lot fewer people would break them and fewer innocent children would die on the roads.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Destroying Isn't New
You know, if the speed limit were reduced to 10 mph, I'd say the number of innocent children that die in road accidents would plummet even MORE.
Please think of the children!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Destroying Isn't New
Yes, think of the children like Walmart does by employee thousands of them to make cheap cell hpones for bloated American perverts with nothing else to do but collect jerk off material via their camera phone ...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment