最初由[苍蝇]发布
说你是法盲,你还紧在这现丑.法律条款都有它的独立性,即使没有第二条,第三条也照样成立,关键是看被侵权者告不告你的问题.
至于你法盲的另一点就是:你上面拍的照片,我根本无权告你,因为你拍的又不是我,懂吗?
对于报纸,杂志上照片的发表等,法律条款都有相应的规定.此外还涉及到摄影记者的职业守则,职业道德等等,不过我可没这么多时间教你,由你去吧!哈哈~
呵呵，真是不到黄河不死心啊。本来是不想再跟你纠缠的，“秀才遇见兵，有理说不清”嘛。  可你非要摆出一副法律专家的样子来，怕真还有人被你唬住了，只好勉为其难，再驳你一次了。
以下是摄影方面侵犯隐私的有关法例：
1. A person is guilty of violation of privacy if, except in the execution of a public duty or as authorized by law, that person intentionally:
A. Commits a civil trespass on property with the intent to overhear or observe any person in a private place; [1997, c. 467, §1 (amd).]
B. Installs or uses in a private place without the consent of the person or persons entitled to privacy in that place, any device for observing, photographing, recording, amplifying or broadcasting sounds or events in that place; [1997, c. 467, §1 (amd).]
C. Installs or uses outside a private place without the consent of the person or persons entitled to privacy therein, any device for hearing, recording, amplifying or broadcasting sounds originating in that place that would not ordinarily be audible or comprehensible outside that place; or [1997, c. 467, §1 (amd).]
D. Engages in visual surveillance in a public place by means of mechanical or electronic equipment with the intent to observe or photograph, or record, amplify or broadcast an image of any portion of the body of another person present in that place when that portion of the body is in fact concealed from public view under clothing and a reasonable person would expect it to be safe from surveillance. [1997, c. 467, §1 (new).]
[1997, c. 467, §1 (amd).]
1-A. It is a defense to a prosecution under subsection 1, paragraph D that the person subject to surveillance had in fact attained 14 years of age and had consented to the visual surveillance. [1997, c. 467, §2 (new).]
2. As used in this section, "private place" means a place where one may reasonably expect to be safe from surveillance, including, but not limited to, changing or dressing rooms, bathrooms and similar places, but excluding a place to which the public or a substantial group has access. [1999, c. 116, §1 (amd).]
3. Violation of privacy is a Class D crime. [1975, c. 499, §1 (new).]
省点事，只挑与此处所讨论问题有关的内容简要说一下：
除极个别例外，隐私只存在于隐私之地。隐私之地指的是可合理地预期免于窥探之地，如更衣、梳妆室，洗手间及其他类似之地，但肯定不包含公共场所。
只有一个例外：人体的隐私之处，在公共场所亦属隐私。这就是为什么在公共场所偷拍裙底属侵犯隐私的原因。
可见，如主贴所示之人像摄影，根本与侵犯隐私无涉。
不要不懂装懂，以免丢丑，跟你说过不止一遍了吧，怎么总不吸取教训呢？想要至少驳倒我一次，挽回点面子？这倒也无可厚非，只是总要有充分把握了才做吧？否则岂不是连离子都丢了？
这样的事情，本来是凭常识就可判断的。如主贴所示之人像摄影，多到无数，绝大部分未经被摄者同意，却连一个侵犯隐私的案例都没有，这岂是只用无人告这样一个理由就能解释得了的？而你所举的案例，不同之处明显得不能再明显了，你却看不出来，或者是为了维护自己的结论故意视而不见。无论是何者，均属严重的思维缺陷。
你的思维如此不严谨，作结论如此轻率，又懒得连GOOGLE一下有关法例这样简单的事都不做，怎可从事IT行业？劝你还是赶紧改行吧。
差点忘了，侵犯隐私可是刑事犯罪哩。我那张照片，虽然没拍你，你也一样可向警方揭发，对我提起公诉。你要是能让警方把我关进牢里，我要向你掬一大躬。我正愁进不去呢。 :O |
楼主: 牧马人
狗仔卡
发表于 2006-7-19 23:04:27
显身卡
楼主
