Click here to go to our new forums at http://tw.forumosa.com
If you are a Forumosan Regular, when you log in for the FIRST TIME, you must RESET your password by using the Password Recovery system.

Usernames on the new forums must not contain any SPACES and must end with LETTER or a NUMBER; if yours does, you will be prompted to change your Username
Contact us at admin(at)forumosa(dot)com or @forumosa on Twitter or on our Facebook Page if you have any questions or problems logging back in

Voyeurism in Taipei

Fun & Games is the place to have fun, be humorous, or get silly. Got a joke or a funny link to share? Fun & Games is the place for it. It is also home of the Game Club.

Re: Voyeurism in Taipei

Postby hsinhai78 » 01 Nov 2013, 00:51

cfimages wrote:
hsinhai78 wrote:
rowland wrote:The phrase "no reasonable expectation of privacy" comes to mind.


The doctrine that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy does apply on taking photos in the MRT - although the TRTC could still exercise their right to ban photography or the publishing of photography done on their premises.

What makes this blog illegal IMHO is that rather than photos of a street scene (i.e. a public place) being published, the faces of individual people are published. The focus does not seem to be on showing a public place but women.

Hence the doctrine you mentioned cannot be applied in this case.


It's only illegal if they sell the photos commercially ie for advertising. Blogs, news reports, magazine articles etc are all legal uses.


You are mistaken. It is not where the photos are taken but rather what is being published. I guarantee any civil suit brought against the photographer by one of the women who are featured in the close-up photos of legs and butt will be successful. These women have their faces exposed and are singled out rather than being on the photo coincidentally - this is not exercising the right to take pictures of a public place.

http://law.moj.gov.tw/eng/LawClass/LawSearchNo.aspx?PC=B0000001&DF=&SNo=195


If any of these girls was the subject of a news story, i.e. a criminal suspect or celebrity of some sort she could be singled out and her image be published for reasons of public interest on blogs or in newspapers.

There is an assumption of privacy even in public places, people will not and should not expect to have a photographer drool over their legs and buttocks and take close-ups and publish them. This is even more so the case with the underage high school girls.

But of course you can say "Oh screw what Xinhai says, I'll do it anyways". Keep us updated about how your case vs. a 15 year old school girls develops though.
User avatar
hsinhai78
Gravel Truck Driver (suìshí chē sījī)
Gravel Truck Driver (suìshí chē sījī)
 
Posts: 1384
Joined: 14 Apr 2012, 22:27
In Taiwan since: 01 Aug 2009



Re: Voyeurism in Taipei

Postby rowland » 01 Nov 2013, 01:13

hsinhai78 wrote:Hence the doctrine you mentioned cannot be applied in this case.


The doctrine gets applied in all sorts of cases where a reasonable person wouldn't dream it applies. Cell phone calls, anyone?

I miss the rule of law.
Big government is for those who can't handle freedom. Political correctness is for those who can't handle reality.

Gun-free zones are where the gun violence happens. Ban gun-free zones before many more get killed. Also, gun violence in Europe is as bad as in US, and getting worse.

The most bigoted people in the world insist that they are the most open-minded, the cruelest people in the world insist that they are the most compassionate, and the most illogical insist that they are the most logical.

Just because Al Gore says there's a planetary emergency doesn't mean there's a planetary emergency. And just because somebody says it's science doesn't mean it's science.
User avatar
rowland
Second Landlord (èr fáng dōng)
Second Landlord (èr fáng dōng)
 
Posts: 2510
Joined: 07 Mar 2012, 04:37
Location: Taipei



Re: Voyeurism in Taipei

Postby cfimages » 01 Nov 2013, 08:05

hsinhai78 wrote:
cfimages wrote:
hsinhai78 wrote:
rowland wrote:The phrase "no reasonable expectation of privacy" comes to mind.


The doctrine that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy does apply on taking photos in the MRT - although the TRTC could still exercise their right to ban photography or the publishing of photography done on their premises.

What makes this blog illegal IMHO is that rather than photos of a street scene (i.e. a public place) being published, the faces of individual people are published. The focus does not seem to be on showing a public place but women.

Hence the doctrine you mentioned cannot be applied in this case.


It's only illegal if they sell the photos commercially ie for advertising. Blogs, news reports, magazine articles etc are all legal uses.


You are mistaken. It is not where the photos are taken but rather what is being published. I guarantee any civil suit brought against the photographer by one of the women who are featured in the close-up photos of legs and butt will be successful. These women have their faces exposed and are singled out rather than being on the photo coincidentally - this is not exercising the right to take pictures of a public place.

http://law.moj.gov.tw/eng/LawClass/LawSearchNo.aspx?PC=B0000001&DF=&SNo=195


If any of these girls was the subject of a news story, i.e. a criminal suspect or celebrity of some sort she could be singled out and her image be published for reasons of public interest on blogs or in newspapers.

There is an assumption of privacy even in public places, people will not and should not expect to have a photographer drool over their legs and buttocks and take close-ups and publish them. This is even more so the case with the underage high school girls.

But of course you can say "Oh screw what Xinhai says, I'll do it anyways". Keep us updated about how your case vs. a 15 year old school girls develops though.


That law you linked has nothing to do with the legality of photography in a public place.

The women may be able to bring a suit under sexual harrassment or stalking laws if she could prove that the guy was actually stalking her, but the actual publishing of anyone photographed in public is legal when used for editorial purposes. If it weren't legal, every magazine and newspaper in the world would have to close down.
User avatar
cfimages
Forumosa's Finest
Forumosa's Finest
 
Posts: 9239
Joined: 30 Oct 2005, 15:39
Location: Across from the other side of the road
In Taiwan since: 0- 0-2003



Re: Voyeurism in Taipei

Postby Elegua » 01 Nov 2013, 08:19

Might be legal, but still waaaaay creepy.
Pleasant it is, when over a great sea the winds trouble the waters, to gaze from shore upon another's great tribulation

"Lord, we ain't what we oughta be. We ain't what we want to be. We ain't what we gonna be. But, thank God, we ain't what we was."
User avatar
Elegua
Retired President (tuì xiū de zǒng tǒng)
Retired President (tuì xiū de zǒng tǒng)
 
Posts: 5631
Joined: 25 Jun 2004, 12:51
Location: The Country that dare not speak it's name



Re: Voyeurism in Taipei

Postby cfimages » 01 Nov 2013, 08:34

Elegua wrote:Might be legal, but still waaaaay creepy.


Agreed. Very creepy.

It's just another example of something that is morally or ethically wrong but not actually illegal.
User avatar
cfimages
Forumosa's Finest
Forumosa's Finest
 
Posts: 9239
Joined: 30 Oct 2005, 15:39
Location: Across from the other side of the road
In Taiwan since: 0- 0-2003



Re: Voyeurism in Taipei

Postby hsinhai78 » 01 Nov 2013, 08:55

cfimages wrote:That law you linked has nothing to do with the legality of photography in a public place.

The women may be able to bring a suit under sexual harrassment or stalking laws if she could prove that the guy was actually stalking her, [...]


Taking close-ups of legs and buttocks and publishing them on the internet (or anywhere else without consent) is a wrongful damage of privacy even if the pictures were taken in a public place. This is the very definition of Civil Code Art. 195. If I was counsel for one of these girls and you were the photographer the court would most definitely side with me.

cfimages wrote: [...] but the actual publishing of anyone photographed in public is legal when used for editorial purposes. If it weren't legal, every magazine and newspaper in the world would have to close down.


If you just happen to be in the middle of a crowd and the purpose is to show the public place rather than showing a single person there is nothing you can do. If there is public interest, i.e. you are a celebrity or high government official there is nothing you can do either (although there are also limitations to that, see last paragraph for an example). Let's say Apple Daily had a series on big breasts or sexy legs and randomly picked girls on the street, took their pictures and published them without consent - the editorial purpose being a series on big breasts or sexy legs - that again would be wrongful damage of privacy under Civil Code Art. 195. I would even go so far as to say that the publication damages the credit and reputation of these women as they are reduced to objects of sexual desire.

And as far as common newspaper practice is concerned: journalists often feed on the worst of tragedies and perverted urges. They could not care less about what is legal or not.

Here is one interesting piece that should change your opinion on the matter: http://www.out-law.com/page-4663
Note that this case involved a celebrity and photos taken in a public place. Considering that, the protection an average person can expect are much higher. This is not Taiwan, but you mentioned magazines and newspapers elsewhere.
User avatar
hsinhai78
Gravel Truck Driver (suìshí chē sījī)
Gravel Truck Driver (suìshí chē sījī)
 
Posts: 1384
Joined: 14 Apr 2012, 22:27
In Taiwan since: 01 Aug 2009



Re: Voyeurism in Taipei

Postby cfimages » 01 Nov 2013, 09:41

Did you look at the blog? On the first three pages (going back roughly a month) there aren't any closeup shots of buttocks and legs. It's mostly full body shots, or head and shoulder shots, and in most of them there are other people in the scene. Upskirt shots, stalking shots etc are certainly illegal but there aren't any.

I could give you a long list of links and cases backing my point up but I won't because it's been discussed before here on numerous occasions. There's a very long tradition of street photography, and in fact, some of the most famous photographs of all time are in this genre.
User avatar
cfimages
Forumosa's Finest
Forumosa's Finest
 
Posts: 9239
Joined: 30 Oct 2005, 15:39
Location: Across from the other side of the road
In Taiwan since: 0- 0-2003



Re: Voyeurism in Taipei

Postby headhonchoII » 01 Nov 2013, 10:01

Yeah well I wouldn't like his chances in front a judge, the MRT does have rules about concealed cameras as far as I remember.
Claim to fame: smoothly cruising towards no.11 no.10 on all time greatest poster list.
headhonchoII
Maitreya Buddha (Mílèfó)
 
Posts: 14698
Joined: 26 Aug 2002, 10:40
Location: Taipei



Re: Voyeurism in Taipei

Postby cfimages » 01 Nov 2013, 10:27

That's not a concealed camera. He's using a DSLR with 70-200mm lens. That's big and very obvious.
User avatar
cfimages
Forumosa's Finest
Forumosa's Finest
 
Posts: 9239
Joined: 30 Oct 2005, 15:39
Location: Across from the other side of the road
In Taiwan since: 0- 0-2003



Re: Voyeurism in Taipei

Postby Icon » 01 Nov 2013, 10:50

headhonchoII wrote:Yeah well I wouldn't like his chances in front a judge, the MRT does have rules about concealed cameras as far as I remember.


Yep, and I've seen tourists being scolded for taking pictures inside of it. We have been blocked and must ask for official permission when taking pictures inside for publication purposes with our big cameras. So what gives?
Lo urgente no deja tiempo para lo importante. Mafalda.

None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought. Eat the delicious food. Walk in the sunshine. Jump in the ocean. Say the truth that you’re carrying in your heart like hidden treasure. Be silly. Be kind. Be weird. There’s no time for anything else.
User avatar
Icon
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 19075
Joined: 09 Feb 2006, 18:03
Location: Xindian



FRIENDLY REMINDER
   Please remember that Forumosa is not responsible for the content that appears on the other side of links that Forumosans post on our forums. As a discussion website, we encourage open and frank debate. We have learned that the most effective way to address questionable claims or accusations on Forumosa is by engaging in a sincere and constructive conversation. To make this website work, we must all feel safe in expressing our opinions, this also means backing up any claims with hard facts, including links to other websites.
   Please also remember that one should not believe everything one reads on the Internet, particularly from websites whose content cannot be easily verified or substantiated. Use your common sense and do not hesitate to ask for proof.
PreviousNext




Return to Fun & Games



Who is online

Forumosans browsing this forum: No Forumosans and 2 guests