Art or theft of privacy?

M

Moab Man

Senior Member
Below is the article link. Basically this guy gets a telephoto lens and starts shooting pictures from his apartment into the neighbors apartments. The neighboring apartments external walls are all glass. The man puts together an art exhibit "The Neighbors" and many are upset with the theft of their privacy. The photographer did not include any faces to identify the individuals in the photos.

My thought, you chose to live in a glass house and not draw your curtains then you are living in a fish bowl on display.

Artist Trying to Sell Super-Secret Photos of NYC Residents: ‘An Outrageous Invasion of Privacy’ | TheBlaze.com
 
D

Dave_W

The Dude
I agree with you, MM. A window is a two-way street, especially in NYC. Peering into windows with telescopes is a time-honored activity so adding a camera to the backend of a telescope is no giant leap of the imagination.
 
M

MrF

Senior Member
I can see why they're upset, but I don't think they have much of a legal leg to stand on. There may be some angle with the fact that the photographer's apartment isn't public property, so it doesn't fall under the usual 'visible from public property' guideline that we all know. The attorney in the article makes an interesting point as well - if you can't identify the person in the photo, how can you claim it's a loss of privacy?

Regardless, this is why they make curtains and blinds.
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
So... They build a "glass house" and then want to complain about privacy issues?

Newsflash! Privacy can't be stolen, only expected (rightly or wrongly).
You CAN, however, give it away at any time.

Case dismissed. NEXT!
 
P

piperbarb

Senior Member
If I am not mistaken, I remember reading something quite a while ago that someone tried to sue a photographer for taking photos of them in their house. The photographer was on the street, the plaintiff did not have his curtains drawn. The court's decision was that the photographer was within his rights because he was on a public street when he took the photo and that the person whose photo was taken was visible from the street. The decision stated that it would have only been an invasion of privacy if the photographer had stepped on the plaintiff's property to take the photo.

I remember discussing this years ago with my father, who was a lawyer. Although he was a staunch defender of personal privacy, he agreed with the court's decision. I think that decision is what has given papparatzi (sp?) free rein to photograph famous people in public and those famous people cannot do much about it.
 
W

WhiteLight

Senior Member
is anything today privacy free??
very soon someone will fa** in the loo & an agent in a government building thousand miles away will be cringing his nose...
 
D

Dave_W

The Dude
piperbarb said:
If I am not mistaken, I remember reading something quite a while ago that someone tried to sue a photographer for taking photos of them in their house. The photographer was on the street, the plaintiff did not have his curtains drawn. The court's decision was that the photographer was within his rights because he was on a public street when he took the photo and that the person whose photo was taken was visible from the street. The decision stated that it would have only been an invasion of privacy if the photographer had stepped on the plaintiff's property to take the photo.

I remember discussing this years ago with my father, who was a lawyer. Although he was a staunch defender of personal privacy, he agreed with the court's decision. I think that decision is what has given papparatzi (sp?) free rein to photograph famous people in public and those famous people cannot do much about it.
Click to expand...

Might that be about the woman who spent something like a year or more photographing an obscure bathroom window that was directly across from her apt. and captured prostitutes and drug addicts and all kinds of strange behavior? She published it and got a lot of attention for it, too.
 
D

Deezey

Senior Member
I have seen several cases like this. Unless you are on their property taking the photos. All is ok.

There was a guy videotaping neighbors from his home. Courts said he can do whatever he wants on his or public property. Case was thrown out.

And as Dave said. When I worked construction building hotels I was surprised some of the buildings did not fall over from all the workers looking into other hotel windows. Fastest way to stop work on a building was someone in another hotel leaving a window open.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2
 
R

Rexer John

Senior Member
If privacy can be expected then it should be (and I believe is) illegal.
Photographing through a crack in a closed curtain is invasion of privacy, as is poking the lens through a letter box etc.

Privacy cannot be expected if lights are on at night and no curtains are at the windows, but in daytime when the curtains are not closed should we expect to be photographed and the pictures published? If so there's something wrong.

Quite honestly, in my opinion the photographer is out of order whether legally safe or not.
Anyone buying his prints are just as bad as the photographer, same with papers that people buy and then complain about the content. Stop buying, simple!
 
P

piperbarb

Senior Member
Dave_W said:
Might that be about the woman who spent something like a year or more photographing an obscure bathroom window that was directly across from her apt. and captured prostitutes and drug addicts and all kinds of strange behavior? She published it and got a lot of attention for it, too.
Click to expand...
I am not sure, but I do remember my father telling me that if a person can be seen without going on the person's property, he/she is fair game for a photo and they cannot do a thing about it. It was an issue that was presented to the court years ago.
 
SkvLTD

SkvLTD

Senior Member
Hmm, some rooms in Yotel in NYC have quite a bit of glass walling, namely bathroom/shower from the inside, but a tall window right next to it.

Honestly, I love that the photographer did exactly that. You see a chance, you take it.
 
W

WhiteLight

Senior Member
Exactly what I thought..
Photographers are looking for something new each time they shoot... Guess he saw this building and clicked away

Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Tapatalk 2
 
Top