Fines And A Destroyed Phone For A Topless Cameraphone Snap Shot

Overhype

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.