Odd question on shooting views into someone elses garden

[mart_e]

<p>I've been asked this question to help out in a neighbours dispute (which I'm very hesitant to get involved with tbh) - but it raised an interesting dilema.</p>

<p>This is in the UK by the way.</p>

<p>A neighbour has been taking shots from their window into an adjacent garden - particularly when the family of that house are outside. Apart from being very odd behaviour, it seems just plain 'wrong'. Apparently they have used an excuse that they are taking photos of 'wildlife'.</p>

<p>However, I don't think they have done anything 'illegal' as such. It's a view that they have anyway, so I'm not sure there is an invasion of privacy.</p>

<p>Obviously what they do with the pictures is another matter entirely.</p>

<p>The bit that complicates it, is that in the UK, if you are erecting CCTV cameras to record activity as crime prevention, you are not permitted to point it at another persons property - although I'm not sure if that is to do with data protection and the avoidance of a complicated data regime to comply with those regulations.</p>

<p>Any thoughts ?<br>

Martin</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>Any thoughts ?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Only that you can point a camera wherever you want and press any of the buttons on it at any time you like whilst on your own property. Use of any images collected however is a different matter.</p>

<p> </p>

[mart_e]

<p>Sure - it does strike me as very odd, particularly as the lens is apparently huge - so not sure quite what they are doing with the photos.</p>

<p>Setting aside the legal right to shoot away from your own property, I'm wondering if there is an argument that a photo, if taken with a huge magnification becomes more of an invasion of privacy ? ie it moves away from replicating a 'natural' view into someones property, and towards capturing what are private family moments in their own home.</p>

<p>This family are getting very agitated by this, although they haven't yet sought any legal advice about it. They have approached the woman, who has said that she is just taking photos of wildlife in her own garden (even though every time she has been seen shooting, it is directly into their garden - no trees, just a lawn, so there really isn't much in the way of wildlife to shoot at all).</p>

<p>Martin</p>

[john_h.1]

<blockquote>

<p>Any thoughts ?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Don't get involved.</p>

[darryl-taylor]

I was under the impression that anyone in a public place is fair game, but on your own property you have a right to privacy. That being said; the privacy laws are a bit murky at the best of times, so I'd suggest speaking to citizens' advice

[railphotog]

<p>Perhaps post some lewd photos, statues or such facing the neighbor? "Bugger off nosey!" </p>

[scott_murphy_photography]

<p>Although what this guy is doing is downright creepy and quite possibly a violation of his neighbor's right to privacy, unless he is doing something with the photos that he should not be doing, I don't think he is stepping outside his rights as a private citizen. Have these people confronted him about this? Maybe they should take a photo of him taking a photo of them!</p>

[mart_e]

<blockquote>

<p>John: Don't get involved.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sure thing - I really don't want to get involved, I posted here really out of interest as much as anything. They asked me mainly as they are friends, and they thought I'd know about right to privacy regarding overlooking views (I'm an architect) and they know I have a bit more than a passing interest in photography.</p>

<p>Scott, it's actually a woman - if it were a man, it would be even more 'suspicious'. I must admit that I'm really curious as to why she is doing this though.</p>

<p>Thanks, Martin</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>I agree with John. Stay out of it.</p>

<p>I don't know what the laws are in the UK, but in the US, in California, there's a state law outlawing the use of telephoto lenses to take photos of people (celebrities) in locations in which they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, even if that location is their own garden (but is normally out of sight of the public)</p>

<p>Even if the act of photogaphy itself is legal, I'd assume there are other laws (harasment, stalking etc.) which might be violated if someone constantly takes pictures of their neighbors against the neighbor's wishes. It's analagous to it being OK to call someone on the phone once a day, but if you call them 100 times a day you cross the line.</p>

 

[colin carron]

<p>I was involved in the 'Images of England' project whereby amateur photogs took photos of listed buildings (400.000 of them) for the English Heritage website. For that project one could take photos of a building from public land but permission was required if you went on to the property itself. In some cases people were delighted to have their homes on the web but others objected strongly and could opt out if they wanted. The main principle is that photography from your own property or a public place is usually OK.</p>

<p>So I think the dodgy neighbour is within his rights purely on the aspect of taking photos. However if he is for example taking photos of children then the police might well take an interest just to ask him what he is doing with these photos. If he wanted to catch the neighbours kids damaging property then he would probably get the police on his side but if he wanted them for voyeurism then the police might want to ask him to explain more.</p>

<p>It might be worth your friend's while to get legal advice from a solicitor as they would be able to explain the legal situation and the options.</p>

<p>As advised above I would keep as much out of this as possible.</p>

<p> </p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>It might be worth your friend's while to get legal advice from a solicitor as they would be able to explain the legal situation and the options.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In the UK we don't tend to go to solicitors or lawyers with everyday questions like Americans seem to. The police or Citizens Advice can provide this service.</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>This reminds me of a neighbor who had a feud going with another neighbor in a place where I thankfully no longer live. She would do stuff like that. In her case, she would stand in her yard and take detailed notes about everyone coming and going from that neighbor's house. To my knowledge she never had any use for this information. Rather, the practice seemed to be intended to annoy, intimidate, and provoke. I suspect that might be the motivation of your local wildlife photographer. If so, having been there and done that, my advice to you would also be not to get involved. It will be a drain of your energy and will achieve nothing. My advice to the "spied on" neighbor would be not to react, but rather to try to start a friendly conversation about lenses or something -- not only to diffuse the situation, but also to open up communication over whatever problem might be annoying the person with the camera.</p>

[phule]

<p>[[scott, it's actually a woman - if it were a man, it would be even more 'suspicious']]</p>

<p>This statement is a perfectly encapsulated example of what is wrong with western society today, doubly so in "all-males-are-pedophiles-England." </p>

[darryl-taylor]

the more dangerous assumption is that all paedophiles are male

[scott_murphy_photography]

<blockquote>

<p><a name="00XOxR"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=482130">Rob Bernhard</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub9.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Oct 01, 2010; 10:37 a.m.</p>

</blockquote>

<blockquote>

<p>[[scott, it's actually a woman - if it were a man, it would be even more 'suspicious']]<br />This statement is a perfectly encapsulated example of what is wrong with western society today, doubly so in "all-males-are-pedophiles-England."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Point well taken. I guess most of us are conditioned to think that males are the culprits. The reality of the matter is that we have had quite a few female teachers in this country begin sexual relations with young male students. Mary Kay Letourneau comes to mind. It utterly sickens me. These supposed teachers have violated the ultimate trust that should exist between teacher and student. It's a soapbox I need to stay off of, as here is not the forum.</p>

[GerrySiegel]

<p>I guess it goes to what is appropriate, before it gets into The Law, which is rarely clearcut as we all know. What if a neighbor was watching your activities with just 10X50 binoculars even. I mean think of the movie "Rear Window." What is laid up photojournalist Stewart do with his Exacta while mending the busted leg?...<br>

I am thinking this. We are all a little bit <em>voyeuristic</em>. And to tell the truth, some of us may be a wee bit exhibitionistic. So, I have been told, not me and you natch but some of us.. Of course this behavior you have reported if just so smells of odd, smells of inappropriate and strange, despite what was offered in explanation. <br>

The tack. How to deal with neighbor relations as they gonna be there for a long time. I mean we do <em>want</em> someone to watch out for odd things in around the place ( Neighborhood Watch org. we call it here) <br>

So- wondering this- has he or she tried," Excuse me, but it really kind of bothers me you know, when I see you photographing me and my guests in our garden. Gets us real nervous. Please stop..." <br>

If <em>this</em> won't do, then we move on to Step No 2. Step No. 2, ahah......well, we salivate at all the juicy ways to deal with peeping Toms and Taras..:-)</p>

[dhbebb]

<p>I'm not a lawyer but ...<br />... it appears to me at a very cursory glance that the spied-on party may have a case under the 1997 Protection from Harassment Act by virtue of the neighbor having alarmed a person or caused them distress on at least 2 occasions. It is up to your friends to decide how much of a problem it is - if they have already spoken to the neighbor without success, the next step is really a solicitor's "cease and desist" letter, which if unsuccessful could be followed by an application for a restraining order (injunction). This will of course sour relations with the neighbor forever, so the question as ever is "Is it worth it?"</p>

[jon_mullen1]

<p>every action is motivated, in saying that, we need to place ourselves into the mind set of the 'wildlife photographer'. I suppose the best tack to adopt is to invite the neighbour down into the back yard so that it's not so clandestine, or annoying...I dunno, it might work toward stopping said neighbour and their inapropriate/annoying behaviour.</p>

[robertjewett]

<p>I am not sure I would actually do this, but the concept of getting a bigger lens than her and photographing HER every time she does this springs to mind...</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>I am not sure I would actually do this, but the concept of getting a bigger lens than her and photographing HER every time she does this springs to mind...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I would definitely do this. After all, what possible complaint could she have?</p>

[dhbebb]

<p><<I am not sure I would actually do this, but the concept of getting a bigger lens than her and photographing HER every time she does this springs to mind...>><br>

Er ... I think that's how the Hatfields and McCoys got started!</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>Yeah, tit for tat is never a good idea, no matter how satisfying it might be at the moment.</p>

<p>I like the idea of inviting the neighbor over into the back yard to get a better camera angle. Express interest in the photos. Ask for camera or lens advice. Try to turn an ugly practice into an opportunity for friendly and constructive communication. That's what I'd do.</p>

<p>Now if I can figure out what to do about a new neighbor who apparently cut down our clothes lines.... Geesh!</p>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>Squirrels could be squirrels. Do they have any squirrels in the garden she could be photographing Squirrels.</p>

[jon_mullen1]

<p>the thought enters my mind that your neighbour has possibly seen you using a camera, and is either showing off, or, is shy and would like to strike up a conversation, but is feeling inadequate and is hoping that being seen with a camera would initiate that which She can't do.</p>