Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/05/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I like this clear and concise answer. It is the law as it stands here in the UK. However we have what is known as 'common law' here in the UK which means this is not written anywhere but is what has developed as a result of the rulings in various court actions over a very long time. Gerry Gerry Walden +44 (0)23 8046 3076 or +44 (0)797 287 7932 www.gwpics.com On 29 May 2013, at 22:50, Bryan Caldwell <bcaldwell51 at earthlink.net> wrote: > > I think the distinction drawn by the California Legislature is a pretty > good one. You cannot trespass to capture an image (visual or audio). And, > you cannot use a technological enhancing device to capture an image that > you couldn't have captured without committing a trespass if you didn't use > said device. (We're talking about civil liability here, not criminal acts.) > > So, standing on a public sidewalk taking a picture of someone in their > front yard would be okay (although they might not like it). Using a remote > helicopter to peer in a fourth floor window or down through a skylight > would not. > > It's also worth remembering that taking the image is one thing. What you > can do with it is another. You can have an image that was legitimately > taken and still use it for purposes that would submit you to civil > liability. > > Bryan > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information