May 5 2010, 15:18:36 #1830 [Y/N 0 Agree] [Y/N 0 S] [Y/N 0 T] [@]

I don't think so. Why should they? They are in a public place where anyone can see them.

May 5 2010, 17:18:01 #1831 [Y/N 0 Agree] [Y/N 0 S] [Y/N 0 T] [@]

I don't think it a problem, although it seems some may try to use the same argument for having homeland security cameras everywhere and then other complains using the same privacy arguement.

May 5 2010, 17:39:48 #1832 [Y/N 0 Agree] [Y/N 0 S] [Y/N 0 T] [@]

If you do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy (i.e. you are in a public place or somewhere easily viewable form a public place) then people do not need your permission to take your photo or a video of you.

OP May 5 2010, 18:03:43 #1833 [Y/N 0 Agree] [Y/N 0 S] [Y/N 0 T] [@]

@1831 I do think there is a dual standard of sorts, and I don't think the government has any business collecting information on the activities of free persons. The difference is that the government has the capacity (regardless of intent or desire) to use that information against freedom.

May 5 2010, 19:37:35 #1834 [Y/N 0 Agree] [Y/N 0 S] [Y/N 0 T] [@]

@1833 I would say that any average citizen has the right to videotape/photograph anyone and anything that is in a public location. But I would just as firmly say that the Federal Government has no right whatsoever to, as you said, collect information on the activities of free persons.

May 6 2010, 13:44:47 #1836 [Y/N 1 Agree] [Y/N 0 S] [Y/N 0 T] [@]

The question has the wrong premise. I'm a shutterbug. I can take pictures of many things. What I can't do is show them. So it's not the taking of the image, it's the publishing of it. A fine, but important line. #1832 is right, if no expectation of privacy existed at the time the image was taken, I am allowed to publish it in almost any medium. No model release required.