Hi y'all-
39-13-605. Unlawful photographing in violation of privacy. —
(a) It is an offense for a person to knowingly photograph, or cause
to be photographed an individual, when the individual is in a place
where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy, without the prior
effective consent of the individual, or in the case of a minor,
without the prior effective consent of the minor's parent or guardian,
if the photograph:
(1) Would offend or embarrass an ordinary person if such person
appeared in the photograph; and
(2) Was taken for the purpose of sexual arousal or
gratification of the defendant.
(b) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires,
“photograph” means any photograph or photographic reproduction, still
or moving, or any videotape or live television transmission of any
individual so that the individual is readily identifiable.
(c) All photographs taken in violation of this section shall be
confiscated and, after their use as evidence, destroyed.
(d) (1) A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(2) If the defendant disseminates or permits the dissemination
of the photograph to any other person, a violation of this section is
a Class E felony.
[Acts 1994, ch. 970, § 2; 1997, ch. 469, §§ 1, 2; 2000, ch. 667, § 2.]
39-13-607. Observation without consent. —
(a) It is an offense for a person to knowingly spy upon, observe or
otherwise view an individual, when the individual is in a place where
there is a reasonable expectation of privacy, without the prior
effective consent of the individual, if the viewing:
(1) Would offend or embarrass an ordinary person if the person
knew the person was being viewed; and
(2) Was for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification of
the defendant.
(b) It is not a defense to a violation of this section that the
defendant was lawfully on the premises where the offense occurred.
(c) If the person being viewed is a minor, this section is violated
regardless of whether the minor or the minor's parent or guardian
consented to the viewing.
(d) A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor
This would seem to make it OK in a church as most preachers love to be
photographed.
On Oct 31, 12:48 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please take nothing I've posted as law...I am not an attorney.
>
> On Oct 31, 10:45 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > great post! thanks Orn! Suppose the rules change a bit if you are selling
> > the stuff though.
>
> > anyone got a contact at a local radio show? we need one:)
> > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 12:10 PM, ornamentalmind
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> > > The little I've been able to find so far is this, from the
> > > photographer's perspective.
>
> > >http://www.bspcn.com/2008/03/18/the-10-legal-commandments-of-photogra...
>
> > > Next stop, nolo press
>
> > > On Oct 31, 9:42 am, "Jason (Memphis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > If a fundamentalist Christian recorded on video/audio statements at
> > > > one of our freethought meetings without our consent and then sent
> > > > those videos to various employers of MFA members who had known
> > > > Christian fundamentalist bosses, would that be a legal, ethical issue
> > > > or both? Would the fundamentalist be breaking the law by recording
> > > > someone on video without their consent? What if minors at our meeting
> > > > were also filmed?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Memphis Freethought Alliance" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
