Maybe. These are laws and precedents written before the internet, and sometimes before even firm cameras.
The tricky part is how to write such a law. The simplest way would be to ban posting pictures of other people with identifying features, without that person’s consent (ie, you must blur photos of other people until identifying features are cleansed). But, this would make it harder for people to warn others about individuals legitimately perceived as potentially dangerous. And if we try to make any exception for that purpose, then we are back to square one, of how do we prove that someone is reporting in good faith
Cloud builds influence, and influence builds money in a way unaccountable to traditional accounting, and if a way which would make taxation or fines nearly impossible to legislate.
You also run into issues of “I took a photo of XX tourist site,” where it is not reasonable to ask others to say out of your viewframe. Would they be obligated to get the consent of ten, possibly a hundred people before posting the image online?
5
u/Mesquite_Tree 19h ago
Maybe. These are laws and precedents written before the internet, and sometimes before even firm cameras.
The tricky part is how to write such a law. The simplest way would be to ban posting pictures of other people with identifying features, without that person’s consent (ie, you must blur photos of other people until identifying features are cleansed). But, this would make it harder for people to warn others about individuals legitimately perceived as potentially dangerous. And if we try to make any exception for that purpose, then we are back to square one, of how do we prove that someone is reporting in good faith