| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/12/2013 08:46:31 AM · #1 |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 08:53:25 AM · #2 |
| Ouch indeed. Apart from the whole street photography thing, how would this impact on photo-journalism? |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 08:54:19 AM · #3 |
| See you all in jail, bunkies! |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 09:00:54 AM · #4 |
| Truly hard to imagine this is an issue that the people of Vermont are concerned about. |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 09:07:07 AM · #5 |
"It is hereinafter illegal to capture the soul of another through the modern digital witchery known as "photography," and it is now extremely prohibited to "fatten the ass" or "broaden the nose" of a rival, enemy, social foe, or even a friend, through use of Photoshop, for dissemination-even as a joke.
(...amendment 53- and every citizen is required to ski at least 60 times per year, despite their physical frailties, whilst eating no less that 4 pounds per week of Cheddar cheese, washed down with no less that 5 gallons per year Grade A Maple syrup.)
Message edited by author 2013-04-12 09:10:16. |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 09:10:09 AM · #6 |
A problem with politicians is that they spend too much time sitting around thinking up ways to justify their paychecks.
|
|
|
|
04/12/2013 09:11:16 AM · #7 |
It sounds like photo journalism is dead.......The govmt has gone crazy.....but then again that is old news....
|
|
|
|
04/12/2013 09:14:04 AM · #8 |
From the comments below the article:
"This bill is from early February. The attorney for NPPA wrote to the Vermont legislature about it and was told by the committee chair that there are no plans to even consider it. That was Feb. 28. So it is dead."
Still - something to remain vigilant about, this disturbing trend towards criminalization of photography. |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 09:33:27 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
A problem with politicians is that they spend too much time sitting around thinking up ways to justify their paychecks. |
+500! |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 09:36:24 AM · #10 |
Does this include security cameras?
Hey, whatever happened to that move to make it illegal to take photographs of the police? |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 09:39:11 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by citymars:
Does this include security cameras?
Hey, whatever happened to that move to make it illegal to take photographs of the police? |
I took a photo of a cop in Toronto, then got his email address so I could send it to him. I took a photo of a cop in New Orleans, and he got up in my face and scared the crap out of me.
|
|
|
|
04/12/2013 09:39:51 AM · #12 |
Let's use some common sense, folks (if that isn't a killer to start off with...)
If people are in public, they have no right to expect privacy, or to have any say on whether or not they are being photographed (or video'ed).
I could see some protection on the USE of the image(s) - similar in concept to what we have for written works - for profit, libel, defamation, etc. |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 09:49:49 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
Originally posted by citymars:
Does this include security cameras?
Hey, whatever happened to that move to make it illegal to take photographs of the police? |
I took a photo of a cop in Toronto, then got his email address so I could send it to him. I took a photo of a cop in New Orleans, and he got up in my face and scared the crap out of me. |
Ya gotta watch out for those New Orleans police. They don't take any crap off anybody
|
|
|
|
04/12/2013 09:57:08 AM · #14 |
| so how will it work when you try to take photograph of a historical site and there are visitors and they come in your photograph? Later on that photograph shows up on some magazine could be for any reason. We dont have any way to know who all were there and get there release sign. |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 10:39:11 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
A problem with politicians is that they spend too much time sitting around thinking up ways to justify their paychecks. |
Too damn right buddy. |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 10:47:41 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
Originally posted by citymars:
Does this include security cameras?
Hey, whatever happened to that move to make it illegal to take photographs of the police? |
I took a photo of a cop in Toronto, then got his email address so I could send it to him. I took a photo of a cop in New Orleans, and he got up in my face and scared the crap out of me. |
Ya gotta watch out for those New Orleans police. They don't take any crap off anybody |
They don't just enforce the law, they make it up to suit their needs as they go. |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 12:13:03 PM · #17 |
| someone ought to follow him around all day and keep taking his picture. |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 12:40:03 PM · #18 |
| Sounds like someone took an unflattering picture of Betty. Or Photoshopped one. |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 12:41:41 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by larryslights:
Sounds like someone took an unflattering picture of Betty. Or Photoshopped one. |
I'm actually wondering about that "On request" part. Who's request? |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 01:34:00 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by larryslights:
Sounds like someone took an unflattering picture of Betty. Or Photoshopped one. |
My thoughts exactly. How stupid *are* these legislators? This is so wrong, on so many levels. Hell, it pretty much makes photography illegal; even if you have a person incidentally in a photo, you're screwed.
|
|
|
|
04/12/2013 01:41:30 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Hell, it pretty much makes photography illegal; even if you have a person incidentally in a photo, you're screwed. |
How about a law making it illegal for people to step into your frame just as you're about to capture that perfect landscape ...? |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 02:19:43 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Hell, it pretty much makes photography illegal; even if you have a person incidentally in a photo, you're screwed. |
How about a law making it illegal for people to step into your frame just as you're about to capture that perfect landscape ...? |
that's a great idea.
also, if they pass that law in jersey do all redlight cameras become illegal?
Message edited by author 2013-04-12 14:19:54. |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 02:48:11 PM · #23 |
Clearly this is stupid. but hardly worth worrying about. Stupid bills get proposed all the time, by all sorts of stupid people. Most of them, like this one, get exactly as much serious consideration as they deserve. In a 2 minute search, I found a proposed bill that would ban foods that were made of aborted human fetuses, proposed bills in 22 states banning sharia law, and one bill that would make dwarf tossing legal in Florida. Most of them are just some sort of grandstanding by someone who knows that their bill will never become law. The rest of the time, the legislator had the best of intentions, but didn't think things through very well.
Back in the 70's, my aunt was a state legislator in one of the less populated states in the middle of the country. I can totally imagine her coming up with something like this.... |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 03:18:41 PM · #24 |
| Once I got pulled up for speeding (I was keeping up with everybody else at the same time, going downhill!!) but I had a friend with me, she took a photo of the cop giving me the ticket but he never said anything, it was obvious what she was doing. :-) |
|
|
|
04/12/2013 03:50:29 PM · #25 |
| looks like Vermont wants to sanction people-less advanced editing, and outlaw expert editing... |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/12/2025 05:49:01 AM EDT.
