Well, if you really want to be pessimistic (as I often am in these
matters), you can think of the world as a ship. And while the ship is
sinking, the rich passengers on the upper decks dance to the gaily
playing orchestra. Some of these passengers know the ship is sinking,
but they think it won't sink fast enough for them to feel the
consequences.
The point is that as long as the laws we're talking about are, at
best, local or state laws, and are interpreted locally, there can
never be a concerted, coordinated movement that will be effective.
The police know, of course, that the photographer has rights; but they
also know that it's enough of a hassle to the photographer so there
won't be any effective resistance.
My guess is that even Alberto may tire of vehement arguments over
time. . . but maybe not and so spark something useful.
-yoram
On Aug 15, 2012, at 9:26 PM, karl shah-jenner wrote:
Alberto Tirado:
In my opinion and first-hand experiences, the big problem with the
criminalization of photography is that photographers have accepted
passively this situation. I have been stopped (apparently for fears
of pedophilia) and taken to a judge, to whom I argued pretty
vehemently while my companion photographer told me to cool down and
forget the whole issue (we were eventually let go).
glad to hear you escaped the wrath of ignorance !
Bloggers write, sometimes journalists touch the subject, but no
real effort is ever done by photographers to revert the increasing
perception that photography is somehow connected to crime. When I
have tried to involve others, including this forum, I have been
left with the impression that I am somehow doing something wrong or
not worth the trouble, as if it was only my personal problem. I
have yet to untap the power of the Internet ;)
A guy called WInston Churchill said once "If you have ten thousand
regulations you destroy all respect for the law"
We also have a legal precedent that ignorance is no excuse of the law.
And while it would be nice if governments sat back, ran the business
of the country and let us all get on with our lives, sadly, many
governments measure their success by the number of laws they
introduce - One law article I read suggested it was unknown how
many laws there were in the US.. that no one could put an actual
number on them all. So back to Churchill's statement. How can
anyone possibly be expected to know all the laws , or rather be
reasonably expected NOT to be ignorant of some laws when the
lawmakers themselves have no idea about all the laws?!
Another thing that irks me is the criminalization of copyright laws.
Copying DVD's, music etc and onselling them to consumers used to
constitute piracy. Now the laws seem to suggest the recipient of
such copying or sharing is a 'pirate' - and then somehow this
changed from being a legal issue between the 'pirate' and the
offended company and it brcame a criminal activity.. how did THAT
happen? - I know I'm wandering off the track here but it all just
gets me angry. especially when you know that these offended
companies have employed other companies to do the 'illegal'
uploading (that the .. !?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photography_and_the_law is an
interesting read. But you are right, people have to voice dissent
when they feel something is unjust.
We let them, and so things are.
and so rose the nazi's and the even more grotesque stasi - and who
will history record as next in line?
k
