Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Man fined over topless phone photos

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 05:54 AM
link   
A SYDNEY man was fined $500 today for taking photographs of topless women on Coogee Beach with his mobile phone.

Labourer Peter Mackenzie, 25, of Coogee, pleaded guilty in Waverley Local Court to behaving offensively in a public place on November 6.

full story

This is stupid the guy didnt trespass on any property. The women chose to go topless in a PUBLIC place. How can taking photos in public be a crime?
If a women took a photo of a topless guy there wouldnt be any fines.




posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 06:07 AM
link   
Question: If I walked on the beach with my 35mm and took the same pictures, would I be fined? Is there a law against taking pictures at the beach?

Also, I find it outrageous that his camera phone will be destroyed! Is this representative of the law of the great Aussie land we always hear about?





posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 06:59 AM
link   
Ihavethesolution:Burka-Beach



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Countermeasures
Ihavethesolution:Burka-Beach



GEEEZZZZZ...i didnt quite get that at first



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Taking photos on a beach is no problem. I think the problem lies in that he did not ask the people for permission to take their picture. I would be mad if a picture of me (without my permission) started to circulate around the internet... I would probably feel even more creeped out if I knew that my picture was going into someone's personal sex-oriented "play with myself" pervert photo collection... The photographed people can assume this, since they were being photographed in this "sneaky" manner without "permissions". If the camera guy walked up to the women, then asked "May I take a photo of you lying here topless for my personal "pleasure" collection? That would be totally different of course...

Btw, I have to ask (I guess I am a little too uncultured to totally understand), but what does the Burka-Beach comment mean?



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 07:33 AM
link   
humm dont know in my oppion If a woman or man is playing around on a public nude beach that constuts primision for someone to eather photo or video .
Come on lets be real If I or you or she or he went nude do you realy belive Befor hand that no ones watching you . this my friend is human natcher . If I dont like the idea of someone taking photos of me nude I dont go NUDE.
and let me ask you one question why did you go to the nude beach NUDE to begine with? Mite it be you want people to see?? humm
ever see thous chicks at martygraw in new orlines? flash you for PLASTIC beeds worth a nickel. Let me tell you now they dont do it for the beeds .
Now wile I find all this Funny as all get out and would never want my wife or dauther nore my self to do this. Its called freedome here in the states the freedom of foolishiness.
To me and im a male thouse girls are very foolish and thous guys worthless as neither think behond there well you know.
and ten years later kids find an old copy of this how or what do you say.
My advice is to think of this befor going were people mite see.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 08:00 AM
link   
This has been to court in the US a number of times over the last few years. The courts have ruled that in the United States, if you are in a public place, you have no right to privacy. By being in a public place, you are giving your consent to be photographed and videotaped. The reason they rule this way is to allow cities to begin installing video cameras on their streets to watch the public 24-7. If they ruled we did have rights to privacy in public, the cities would lose the right to put up cameras on the streets. So choose what you do wisely when out in public, someone is always watching and they probably have a camera.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 08:03 AM
link   
Well. It depends on the purpose of the photos. You & i know he probably just took them to show his mates but if he didn,t ask permission it is really an invasion of privacy even if they are in public. I mistrust people who are waving a camera or a phone around in public as i do not know their purpose. If they are sightseeers & you happen to get in the background, no worries but i would confront someone who was deliberately taking a pic of me or my kids without permission & if he did not have a reasonable explanation his equipment would be at risk of an outer space journey of considerable distance.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 12:01 AM
link   
Originally posted by Wombathole
Well. It depends on the purpose of the photos. You & i know he probably just took them to show his mates but if he didn,t ask permission it is really an invasion of privacy even if they are in public. I mistrust people who are waving a camera or a phone around in public as i do not know their purpose. If they are sightseeers & you happen to get in the background, no worries but i would confront someone who was deliberately taking a pic of me or my kids without permission & if he did not have a reasonable explanation his equipment would be at risk of an outer space journey of considerable distance.

I understand that you want to protect your kids from creeps.
How do you know if someone is deliberately taking photos of your kids in a large group of people?
Now If someone took photos in a public toilets or in someones property then that would be a Violation of privacy.
Who are we to say what someone can do in public. If you cant take photos without risking upseting someone you my as well bann cameras in public ( a real bad idea!)
I guess there is no such thing as a public place a bit like free education in name only.



posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 12:41 AM
link   
He could not have been prosecuted if there had not been a law prohibiting such conduct. I am guessing that if he had used a dedicated photograpy device (camera) instead of a cell phone he might not have been arrested, although he might have been confronted and detained by the "partner."

After the advent of camera phones and some cases of abuse, many jurisdictions passed laws against taking pictures without a person's knowledge. In the past, taking a person's picture was not a crime, although what one did with it afterward might well be.

This guy would have been better off to buy himself a nice camera with a telephoto lens. They have some nice digital models now with image stabilization for under $500.



posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 12:59 AM
link   
Yes, it's an issue of privacy.

The "you can take pictures at a public event" won't work here. At a public event, you can't just walk up to folks and take pictures of their body parts (clothed or not.) You can take crowd shots if you like, but no ambling up, snapping, and ambling off.

That's what this guy was doing. He would have gotten the same fine if he'd walked up to guys and took pictures of the crotches of the ones in Speedos.

And no, not all nudists (some of my family members are nudists) are exhibitionists. In fact, MOST of them are people that you young guys wouldn't want to look at in the nude.



posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 09:43 AM
link   
absolutely. you cant take a personal picture, especially of erotic areas, without permission. i laugh seeing how some laws are broken all the time.

i do think it absurd that he would faced three months in jail. thats nuts.



posted on Feb, 3 2005 @ 06:12 PM
link   
As an Australian Photographer, who lives on the beach this story has angered me.

As mentioned previously by someone, in a public place you have no privacy - I agree with that. And if women or blokes don't want to be looked at then put some damn clothes on.

Scenario?

I walk on the to beach and women are laying there with the tits out for the entire world to see. An hour later I see the same women in town somewhere and say "hey, can I see your tits?". I would get a slap in the face. I know this is irrelevant but I have often wonder why it is that on a beach it is all on display but anywhere else there is no chance.

Anyway, it is true that in Australia a photographer can take pictures of any thing at any time of anyone in a public place. I think this guys problem was that what he did was in bad taste and the mob really wanted to hang him. The Police were really able to do nothing as he had not broken any laws.

I take photos for a local paper and have been told by the editor that if they are in a public place then to bad. If you don't want it seen then don't show them in public.

I was out with my 10 year old son 12 months ago at the beach happily taking photos of him playing in the surf. 15 feet away from him was a lovely young lady in a bikini who started with her top on but then removed it. I took a few pictures (they turned out really well) and then approached her and asked her permission - she said "no problem". The point is that I didn't have to ask permission, but I felt it was the right thing to do. Maybe I should have asked first, rather than after I had pressed the shutter button.

The bloke in the # now here in Oz didn't ask but then again he didn't have to. It only got out of control when the womans boyfriend freaked out, but the boyfriend should have said "put your top back on" if he didn't want people looking ot taking pictures.

Craig



posted on Feb, 3 2005 @ 07:44 PM
link   
What we dont get to see the pictures?









 
0

log in

join