[ILUG-BOM] Minutes: Feb 2006 GLUG meet at HBCSE
Sat Feb 25 19:34:53 IST 2006
On Saturday 25 February 2006 6:46 pm, Abhishek Daga wrote:
> --- JTD <jtd at mtnl.net.in> wrote:
> > But publishing a series of photos of someone in various public
> > places in order to build up a fake story is definetly a
> > violation.
> Assuming that the act was committed in a public place. Is a pub a
> public place? I am asking. I dont know whats the technicality here.
> Does "right to admission reserved" make it a private place where
> right to privacy takes precedence over right to freedom of
It does become a private place. And such establishments will tell you
"no photos". Which is kinda defeating cause every reporter worth his
r will be diving in with cameras.
If some story that has public interest (basically acts that usurp the
commons, acts leading to violation of the law / other's rights) was
published with photos from even a private area I think it would be
fully justified. We do have many such definitions where photography
is restricted due to "security" and "public interest". Our railway
stations and airports for example. Never mind that you could walk in
from jari mari or fire a missile from the slums surrounding it.
On a side note my cousin was shooting with a camcorder recently at
Matheran. Some girls were walking around. One of them jumped up and
started creating a ruckus. My cousin refused to erase his recording
and told them to get out of public places if they dont want to be
photographed. In any case he added he preferred the monkeys they look
good in comparison.
More information about the Linuxers