bobatkins Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 <p>If you think your rights as a street photographer in the USA are under threat, read this. It could be worse...</p> <p>"<em>For example, Article 3 of the law sets a penalty of one-year imprisonment or a fine that does not exceed SR500,000</em> [$133,333]<em> for anyone who uses a cell phone to take a picture that violates the privacy rights of others and then posts the picture on social media websites.</em><br> <em>Taking pictures as a hobby can lead you straight to prison if you violate the cybercrime law and post the picture online</em>."</p> <p>http://english.alarabiya.net/en/media/digital/2015/02/07/The-downside-of-street-photography-in-Saudi-Arabia.html</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kahn Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 <p>Well, Saudi Arabia is not exactly a bastion of liberal democracy in any legal arena, so I'm not surprised. I noticed that the article following this one reports that Pakistan is suspending YouTube "indefinitely". Imagine that...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karim Ghantous Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 <p>You'd think a society which has beheadings and floggings as punishments for criminals would not be so insufferably precious about having women - mostly covered anyway - photographed in public. But then, Saudi society is insufferably precious about more than just photography. I guess all we Westerners have to put up with are extremely religious parents concerned to tears about the influence and popularity of Harry Potter.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 <p>I'm surprised that they allow any kind of camera at all.<br /> Some people 'of the book' take the second commandment very seriously, and not only Muslims:</p> <blockquote> <p>Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, <strong>or any <em>likeness</em> [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth</strong></p> </blockquote> <p>Interpretations also differ of the Second Amendment, but that's another thing altogether...<strong><br /></strong></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User_6502147 Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 <p>Not sure I understand how the law applies. You take a picture of someone in burka and the eyes are exposed.....you put it on the social media...and end up in jail/fine ? I can see if this was done in the privacy of someone's home/bedroom....and how that would be a violation of privacy.</p> <p>Disclaimer: Not obsessed with burkas, have no desire to go to S. Arabia....and have no cyber connections to soc media. I'll probably be flogged for that :>).</p> <p>Les</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotolopithecus Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 <p>Yes that law could certainly put the kibosh on anything but Landscape, architecture, and pet photography.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 <p>I've traveled in the Muslim world and had no problems photographing except at mosques and in people's homes, so it's not simply a religious issue. Saudi Arabia has its own set of rules. Restricting photography is far less egregious than restricting the right of women to drive.</p> Music and Portraits Blog: Life in Portugal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim_Lookingbill Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 <blockquote> <p>Restricting photography is far less egregious than restricting the right of women to drive.</p> </blockquote> <p>More egregious than restricting extremists high quality snuff videos posted online?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 <p>The influence of Salafists does have a lot to do with very rigid interpretations of religious injunctions, not only in Saudi Arabia, but elsewhere.<br> In the old days and as recently as 2007 I even have been able to take pictures in mosques, so it's not all flavors of Islam.</p> <p>I confess that I personally am more in favor of a Falafelist (فلافل) viewpoint than Salafist. (please just ignore this if you can).</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_s Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 <p>It's an interesting little article, but it probably has no direct significance to most of us here. It only directly impacts three groups of people: (i) Saudi nationals, (ii) foreigners working under contract, and (iii) Muslim folks making Hajj. Very few others ever get to visit Saudi Arabia. I suspect those three groups would have some idea how to behave, or at least be briefed, but like the article says, you never know!</p> <p>It touches on a couple of points, though. One is that you have to obey the laws of the country you're in. One sometimes hears laughable stories of tourists who think the laws don't apply to them, because they're a (choose one) westerner/white man/citizen of such-and-such. Often it does not end well . .</p> <p>Second is the extension <em>ad absurdum</em> of the 'graven image' belief mentioned by JDMvW, when real extremists have destroyed cultural and religious artifacts which have much broader significance. That, I think, is a real tragedy, but he would know better than me.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgussin Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 I had a bag of garbonzo beans in the fridge, but I threw them out...I figured they would only make me felafel (feel awful). Seriously, as Western culture grows more tolerant, it makes more "traditional" cultures seem even less free. And whether it's religious considerations, security considerations, intellectual property considerations, politcal considerations, one of today's great ironies is that as the ease of capturing and sharing images increases, the obstacles to doing so seem to increase as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordan2240 Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 <p>I'm not sure I see any problem with the law, if I'm reading it correctly. I've often wondered why we in the U.S. allow posting images of others to social websites without permission. Let's say, for example, you are a teacher in a conservative school that does not allow drinking. You're at a private party, and someone photographs you with a drink in your had then posts it on a social website. Someone at the school sees it, and you suffer the consequences, whatever they are. Why is the person who took the picture and posted it not liable for the damage? And maybe you weren't even drinking, but simply getting a drink for someone else.</p> <p>It sounds to me like the Saudis are siding in favor of the subject rather than the photographer, which I see as appropriate.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wouter Willemse Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 <blockquote> <p>as Western culture grows more tolerant, it makes more "traditional" cultures seem even less free.</p> </blockquote> <p>I don't disagree in general but I think it is a bit more complicated than that. Some of the responses in this thread show little tolerance, but harsh judgement over the alleged inferior culture in the Middle East. This is not something new. Many in the western culture are growing less tolerant, and more convinced of the superiority of our culture and historical luggage. What if we are wrong? Just as a hypothetical question, it is useful to contemplate it before judging the laws of other countries. Not that Saudi Arabia is the shining example to 'measure' up against, far from it, but in general...<br /> While the city is unfortunately famous for other things, Palermo hosts some spectacular sites that should have us all scratching our heads when we talk about tolerance and freedom. 12th century Palermo was ruled by Christian kings, with many Arab scholars at their court who maintained their tradition in science, and passed it on (which are the basis of 'our' mathematics, and the revival of ancient Greek that was part of what spurred the Renaissance), and a lot of their arts. The city hosted a lot of jews, which only later - when the Christians became more convinced of their culture - were forced into their own neighbourhood. Similar history goes for the south of Spain - cultures living alongside, mingling and taking the best of one another. Maybe we just should sometimes question our beliefs in progress and the virtues of our own culture. And a lot of people in the Middle East should wonder about the same thing too, actually... yeah, these Saudi-Arabic laws are hard to rhyme with freedom of expression and free press, basically.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Landrum Kelly Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 <blockquote> <p>Some of the responses in this thread show little tolerance, but harsh judgement over the alleged inferior culture in the Middle East. This is not something new. Many in the western culture are growing less tolerant, and more convinced of the superiority of our culture and historical luggage.</p> </blockquote> <p>I do offer a harsh judgment of the culture, but not of its people. It is a culture that mandates the suppression of women, the stoning of adulterers, etc. that is intolerant, not those of us who are intolerant of intolerance to the point of abjuring brutality and the extinction of freedom.</p> <p>Next thing, you'll be telling us that we should be tolerant of anti-Semitism, or the Nazis.</p> <p>Photography? Well, on that narrower issue, cameras can indeed be intrusive. I do not recognize a right to take a photo at anytime and post it anywhere. There do have to be limits, but surely less draconian approaches are possible than that of the Saudis.</p> <p>--Lannie</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wouter Willemse Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 <p>My intention isn't to justify anything, Lannie, nor accept everything. I live in a zone where I see the direct results (that is, many people fleeing from Syria and several African countries arrive in the area where I live), so I've got an idea what is going on there.<br /> And at the same time, I know people who visited several of those countries, and they really noticed nothing of this alleged culture of stoning, suppressing women etc. The image drawn to us by the media isn't that accurate. You're right to seperate the culture from the people, yet at the same time, the people is that culture. And that's a bit the point I tried to make: it's hard to generalise the situation as the state-induced "culture" isn't necessary the people's culture, and what we read about or see on TV isn't necessarily the whole story.</p> <p>[EDIT]: and ooops, Q.G. is absolutely right.... </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
q.g._de_bakker Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 It's the Off Topic Forum all over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karim Ghantous Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 <p>Keeping on the topic, I'd like to disagree with Bill:</p> <blockquote> <p>I've often wondered why we in the U.S. allow posting images of others to social websites without permission. Let's say, for example, you are a teacher in a conservative school that does not allow drinking...</p> </blockquote> <p>I do not completely dismiss what you are saying, Bill. But I believe in personal responsibility. You break the school's rules, you pay. If it's a misunderstanding, you will be given the benefit of the doubt. Rules may be enforced, but cannot be enforced though mere perception (I've had people in my former job try several times to get me in deep poop, but even though they really wanted me skewered, they knew they had nothing concrete, so they let it go). If I may be so bold: what next, a ban on photographing police officers in public, just in case they make a mistake?...</p> <blockquote> <p>the alleged inferior culture in the Middle East.</p> </blockquote> <p>Not guilty. Sure, they can be backwards, but so can we. You could not buy The DaVinci Code in Lebanon (the land of my birth, of which I am proud) for a while, and maybe you still can't.</p> <p>In at least one European country (perhaps it's Belgium), you can freely take photos of people, including children, but you need their parents' permission to post the photos publicly. I think that's stupid and unworthy of consideration, but I don't make the law.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim_Lookingbill Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 <blockquote> <p>"<em>For example, Article 3 of the law sets a penalty of one-year imprisonment or a fine that does not exceed SR500,000</em> [$133,333]<em> for anyone who uses a cell phone <strong>to take a picture that violates the privacy rights of others</strong> and then posts the picture on social media websites..."</em></p> </blockquote> <p>Have the Saudi's defined by law what encompasses "privacy rights"? It would be interesting to know if it's similar to westerner's. That's a pretty broad and vague "right" IMO.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Landrum Kelly Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 <p>I want to make it clear that my judgments were directed solely against the specific abuses in Saudi culture mentioned above, not against Middle Eastern culture in general. I know full well that U.S. culture has problems as well, including what I see as rising militant nationalism, militarism, and the highest rate of incarceration in the world.</p> <p>In spite of our defects, we do have a pretty open culture by world standards. I believe that that is good. Even there, we are hardly perfect. Repression exists in all cultures, and it exists here.</p> <p>Photography and the arts in general do flourish better in open cultures. There are places more open than the U.S., of course. The Netherlands and the Scandinavian countries and Finland (among others) could teach us some things.</p> <p>--Lannie</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordan2240 Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 <p>Karim,</p> <p>I understand what you are saying, but where do we draw the line then? What if someone photographs me naked through a window in my home and posts it online? What if I'm sunbathing nude in privacy and a drone flies overhead and takes a shot? Why is my privacy potentially overridden by your (not you personally) right to take a photo? The list can go on and on describing situations where someone might not want their picture posted on facebook or the like, and many of them have nothing to do with doing anything wrong. Enough people CHOOSE to post compromising shots of themselves on social media. If I choose not to, that right should not be overridden by someone else making a different choice for me.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyanatic Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 <blockquote> <p>I understand what you are saying, but where do we draw the line then? What if someone photographs me naked through a window in my home and posts it online? What if I'm sunbathing nude in privacy and a drone flies overhead and takes a shot? Why is my privacy potentially overridden by your (not you personally) right to take a photo?</p> </blockquote> <p>I am not an expert on the law, but it is my understanding that in the US your right to privacy in those situations is not overridden by someone's right to take a photo as they both meet the <em>reasonable expectation of privacy</em> test. (Unless, of course, you choose to stand naked in your front window with the curtains open and you are visible from the street. That's a trickier situation and may not meet the test.) </p> <p>As for Saudi Arabia -- Their country, their rules.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
q.g._de_bakker Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Is there a "right to take a photo" written into law? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted February 9, 2015 Author Share Posted February 9, 2015 <p>Speaking of bad behavior and disrespect of other cultures by US photographers/tourists...</p> <p>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/ariz-sisters-arrested-naked-photos-cambodia-temple-article-1.2106871</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelChang Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 <blockquote> <p><em>"Speaking of bad behavior and disrespect of other cultures by US photographers/tourists..."</em></p> </blockquote> <p>They are extremely lucky that they weren't in Saudi Arabia. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karim Ghantous Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 <blockquote> <p>I am not an expert on the law, but it is my understanding that in the US your right to privacy in those situations is not overridden by someone's right to take a photo as they both meet the <em>reasonable expectation of privacy</em> test.</p> </blockquote> <p>That makes sense. I know that you can take photos of houses, but not necessarily the people in them, depending.</p> <blockquote> <p>Is there a "right to take a photo" written into law?</p> </blockquote> <p>No more than is the right to engage in post-modern interpretive dance. However, I imagine that in America this would fall under the First Amendment. It bifurcates from there onwards.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now