Snapshots from cell phones test boundaries of privacy [Little brother]

The Charlotte Observer (Registration required, sorry) ^ | Posted on Sun, Oct. 12, 2003 | AMY HARMON

[TaxRelief]

As the man in front of him at the grocery store last week began yelling at a cashier who could not process his American Express card, Gary Dann flipped open his palm-sized camera phone and pressed a few buttons, pretending to look up a number.

Moments later, as the man paid in cash, his snarling picture appeared on Dann's Web site (www.fotolog.net/garydann), complete with a less than flattering caption. The rapidly growing audience of Internet phonecam voyeurs responded quickly to the image: "Did he make a big fuss?" asked one. "I hate watching that."

Wielding James Bond technology that can now be mass produced, an army of amateurs is quietly redrawing the boundaries of privacy in public spaces -- unknown to most of their subjects.

.... Legally, the new generation of shutterbugs is probably safe for now. In a public place, the expectation of privacy, which American courts must weigh in evaluating whether a violation has occurred, is assumed to be negligible. News cameras can photograph people in public without their permission, and we have become accustomed to security cameras watching us in elevators and at ATMs.

But ethically, the new surveillance tools seem to puncture a long- held assumption that it is possible -- and often desirable -- to lose oneself in the crowd.

In an image-conscious culture, hidden cameras in the hands of fellow citizens with instant access to a global audience may provoke more outrage than government or corporate surveillance cameras whose images are not shared with the world.

Camera phone photographers defend their furtive shots in the name of free expression and grass-roots documentation. Each seems to have arrived at a personal privacy etiquette, such as it is.

...more.

[TaxRelief]

Sorry that a full easy-to-reach link is not here. I think I have excerpted the important parts that would be relevant to a real discussion.

[Support Free Republic]

	God Bless Those who Protect our Liberty --- Past, Present and Future.
Please visit the FR Fundraiser

[Ditter]

Small cameras have been around a long time. Sorry but I don't see any difference here. So now you have a phone & a camera combined, so what?

[ovrtaxt]

Now this is an issue that I haven't really considered. But my kneejerk thoughts are - I trust the American citizen WAY more than the American government. If someone wants to snap my picture in public, I couldn't care less. The internet could use some visual improvement, and I am really good looking, as well as also modest too. As well.

[AAABEST]

I'm with you. 500 rotten kids running around with these things bothers me 500 times less than the government putting up just 1.

[eno_]

Cameras are already banned at TSA checkpoints in airports. Security? Ha ha ha ha ha. They don't want galleries of TSA mutants appearing on the Web.

[ovrtaxt]

There's an interesting twist! The government, fearful of the 'big brother' effect by it's own citizens! Hmmmm, the possibilities...

[camas]

don't worry about the little monsters they are all frying their brains every time they use them. before flaming me remember "more doctors smoke camels then any other brand"

[AAABEST]

I won't "flame" you, your brain has already been fried.

That's what you get for not wearing your tinfoil hat.

[camas]

i always use one.

[hoosierham]

Cell phones with cameras are now an issue at manufacturing and other business sites. Besides the distraction of phones ringing there is the possibility someone will send out pictures of propietary info or processes.

Welcome to Fishbowl World.

[Bob Mc]

We need more laws to restrict subjects (err citizens) from having these survielance cameras and violating our rights. Only the government has a need for survielance cameras and to violate rights. It's for the children. >sarcasm off>

[Puddleglum]

Welcome to Fishbowl World.

Yep - of course, in some ways it's like small town life when everybody used to know who was up to what. It'd be odd if conscience crept back into folks through technology.

[1rudeboy]

That's an interesting thought. Can you imagine if the proliferation of cell-phone cameras led to a more civil society? [I'm not taking a postition one way or the other].

[Eala]

If someone wants to snap my picture in public,

If they want to take mine, they better be sure they have an extra-heavy duty lens. I can shatter mirrors at 40 paces. *\;-) (There's a reason you're hard pressed to see Eala in his after-action photo reports.)

[WellsFargo94]

A point not considered before...thank you for sharing.

[PBRSTREETGANG]

It'd be odd if conscience crept back into folks through technology.

Interesting take. We'll see.

(Unfortunately, in this day and age, it's probably more likely that the camera phones will be creeping into women's locker rooms.)

[eno_]

I don't know if they have gotten that far, but mobileasses.com shows you where they have been so far.

[null and void]

Welcome to Fishbowl World.

The Dead Past - Issac Asimov...