Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dave_W" data-source="post: 98205" data-attributes="member: 9521">An Example A photographer goes to a local mall, camera in hand, without informing the mall that he would be there. He shoots some people walking around and some of the store displays. This is legal. He shoots some of the kids playing in the little playground the mall has set up. This is legal.In a drugstore, a woman gets a prescription and stands in a corner to read the instructions. The photographer uses a zoom lens and gets a nice, tight shot of her reading the paperwork, in which you can see that it’s a bottle of Prozac. Taking this shot is illegal because the woman, standing in the corner, has an expectation of privacy. While in the food court, a mall security guard spies the photographer and asks him to stop shooting. The photographer refuses and continues taking pictures. Taking these pictures is legal.  Angry, the security guard orders the photographer to leave the premises. The photographer refuses. He is now trespassing. He continues to take photos, including of the security guard. Taking these pictures is legal.The guard then escorts the photographer to the mall offices, where he is asked to wait. While there, he walks around a bit and takes photographs of people working in their offices doing company business. Taking these pictures may not be legal as the people in those offices have an expectation of privacy.  The mall manager informs the photographer that he is banned from the premises and demands that he turn over his film or digital media. The photographer refuses. The manager then demands that he not publish any of the photos he took in the mall and has him escorted from the premises. The photographer publishes many of the photos he took, despite the manager’s demand. This is legal. He publishes photos of the kids playing in the playground, although he didn’t ask their parents’ permission. This is legal as they had no expectation of privacy. He publishes the photograph of the woman examining her Prozac prescription. The photographer risks a lawsuit as this reveals private facts about the woman that have no news value and that a reasonable person would not want revealed.He publishes the photos of the mall office, and of the people working there — none show what they are working on, or any private or embarrassing information. The risk of a lawsuit is minimal even though taking the photos themselves may not have been. He adds a caption to one of the office-worker photos, “Roger McMurty of the Lone Pine Mall works on his résumé one Thursday afternoon.” The photographer risks a lawsuit as this portrays McMurty in a false light — implying that he is looking for a job and doing personal work on company time. Another of the office-worker photos shows a woman facing front and pointing to a chart. The photographer sells this to a stock-photo house which will then resell it. This may not be legal as it may misappropriate the woman’s image. The next day, the photographer returns to the mall despite being banned and takes more general pictures. Being there is illegal; he’s trespassing. But taking the photographs is not, as long as he is not violating anyone’s privacy. He is caught by security and escorted from the building. He publishes the photos he took. This is legal.</blockquote>

Verification