RISKS TO PHOTOGRAPHS ON INTERNET
Photographs
on the Internet
Today
many people have digital cameras
and post their photographs online, for example street photography practitioners do so for
artistic purposes and social
documentary photography
practitioners do so to document the common people in everyday life. The people
depicted in these photos might not want to have them appear on the Internet.
Police arrest photos, considered public record in many jurisdictions, are often
posted on the internet by numerous online mug shot publishing
sites.
Some
organizations attempt to respond to this privacy-related concern. For example,
the 2005 Wikimania conference required that photographers have the prior
permission of the people in their pictures, albeit this made it impossible for
photographers to practice candid photography and doing the same in a
public place would violate the photographers' free speech
rights. Some people wore a 'no photos' tag to indicate they would prefer not to
have their photo taken.
Template:See
above photo
The Harvard Law Review published a short piece
called "In The Face of Danger: Facial Recognition and Privacy Law",
much of it explaining how "privacy law, in its current form, is of no help
to those unwillingly tagged."
Any individual can be unwillingly tagged in a photo and displayed in a manner
that might violate them personally in some way, and by the time Facebook gets
to taking down the photo, many people will have already had the chance to view,
share, or distribute it. Furthermore, traditional tort law does not protect
people who are captured by a photograph in public because this is not counted
as an invasion of privacy. The extensive Facebook privacy policy covers these
concerns and much more. For example, the policy states that they reserve the
right to disclose member information or share photos with companies, lawyers,
courts, government entities, etc. if they feel it absolutely necessary. The
policy also informs users that profile pictures are mainly to help friends
connect to each other.
However, these, as well as other pictures, can allow other people to invade a
person’s privacy by finding out information that can be used to track and
locate a certain individual. In an article featured in ABC News, it was stated
that two teams of scientists found out that Hollywood stars could be giving up
information about their private whereabouts very easily through pictures
uploaded to the Internet. Moreover, it was found that pictures taken by some
phones and tablets including iPhones
automatically attach the latitude
and longitude
of the picture taken through metadata
unless this function is manually disabled.
Face
recognition technology can be used to gain access to a person's private data,
according to a new study. Researchers at Carnegie Mellon University combined
image scanning, cloud computing and public profiles from social network sites
to identify individuals in the offline world. Data captured even included a
user's social security number.
Experts have warned of the privacy risks faced by the increased merging of our
online and offline identities. The researchers have also developed an
'augmented reality' mobile app that can display personal data over a person's
image captured on a smartphone screen.
Since these technologies are widely available, our future identities may become
exposed to anyone with a smartphone and an Internet connection. Researchers
believe this could force us to reconsider our future attitudes to privacy.
Google
Street View
Google Street View,
released in the U.S. in 2007, is currently the subject of an ongoing debate
about possible infringement on individual privacy. In an article entitled “Privacy,
Reconsidered: New Representations, Data Practices, and the Geoweb”, Sarah
Elwood and Agnieszka Leszczynski (2011) argue that Google Street View
“facilitate[s] identification and disclosure with more immediacy and less
abstraction.” The medium through which Street View disseminates information, the
photograph, is very immediate in the sense that it can potentially provide
direct information and evidence about a person’s whereabouts, activities, and
private property. Moreover, the technology’s disclosure of information about a
person is less abstract in the sense that, if photographed, a person is
represented on Street View in a virtual replication of his or her own real-life
appearance. In other words, the technology removes abstractions of a person’s
appearance or that of his or her personal belongings – there is an immediate
disclosure of the person and object, as they visually exist in real life.
Although Street View began to blur license plates and people’s faces in 2008, the technology is faulty and does not
entirely ensure against accidental disclosure of identity and private property. Elwood and Leszczynski note that “many
of the concerns leveled at Street View stem from situations where its
photograph-like images were treated as definitive evidence of an individual’s
involvement in particular activities.” In one instance, Ruedi Noser, a Swiss
politician, barely avoided public scandal when he was photographed in 2009 on
Google Street View walking with a woman who was not his wife – the woman was
actually his secretary. Similar situations occur when Street
View provides high-resolution photographs – and photographs hypothetically offer
compelling objective evidence. But as the case of the Swiss
politician illustrates, even supposedly compelling photographic evidence is
sometimes subject to gross misinterpretation. This example further suggests
that Google Street View may provide opportunities for privacy infringement and
harassment through public dissemination of the photographs. Google Street View
does, however, blur or remove photographs of individuals and private property
from image frames if the individuals request further blurring and/or removal of
the images. This request can be submitted, for review, through the “report a
problem” button that is located on the bottom left-hand side of every image
window on Google Street View, however, Google has made attempts to report a
problem difficult by disabling the "Why are you reporting the street
view" icon.
No comments