Camera Phones and dirty things LMAO

[Jagged]

Ok, i was reading this article on camera phones and that in some places there banned, because some guys were placing them on their shoes and going up and talking with girls with skirts on... needless to say they were taking random pictures up their skirts... Also i read that they were bringing them into locker rooms and such. What do you think about this? would you do something like that LMAO. And do you agree with banning them from places like that? is it really fair that few make everyone suffer?

[rich101682]

I don't think it's fair to ban them, but I would believe that people would use them for dirty stuff like that because males for the most part are very dirty and horny. But we're also very resourceful.

It would suck to have to check your phone at the door when going out though. Especially if you're expecting a call.

[Kali]

personally, i couldn't care less either way, but banning camera phones would sure make things a lot less awkward.

just the other day i was walking into school and realised a bloke sitting outside was taking a photo of me with his phone. i turned away straight away but who knows if he got picture or not, or what he'll do with it.

it's unbelievable the number of times it's happened to me and friends of mine; we've even been followed all the way home in the car by guys trying to get a snapshot - it's awful.

however, this behaviour is very much a result of the sort of society i live in, and is most likely not as extreme in most other places.

[psychopatpl]

in some countries it requires a sound of a camera to play when you take the picture, its pretty loud like a ringtone but im sure they have ways around it...

i am not really into cellphones, my cellphone is as plain as they come, i hate things that come as a package because certain companies make things better than others..

[Kali]

certain companies make things better than others..that's business for you, no matter the industry, no matter where in the world.

why do you think microsoft made it so big? they monopolise the market because of the way things come in a 'package'. it's very much "you want this? well you have to buy this as well then."

they've been getting into trouble for it though.

[Mr Stabby]

they've been getting into trouble for it though.

oh yes, for one monoplies aren't permitted for business to take part in....so to allow for healthy competition an so the consumer has an eqaul chance for an alternate product.....but in the real world this is crap....as microsoft have proven.but they're not just in trouble for this....they also are in trouble for numerous other cases.

[SpudNuts]

The US Government beat them in court, the appeal is ongoing but they won't win. they're just trying to drag it out for as long as possible and when they lose, they'll be split into two companies and forced to compete with each other.

[Mr Stabby]

The US Government beat them in court, the appeal is ongoing but they won't win. they're just trying to drag it out for as long as possible and when they lose, they'll be split into two companies and forced to compete with each other.

spud they will never lose...the will never win either, they will keep throwing money at it until the other side back down.....its how they have gotten away with it for years, and it being the government makes no difference.

[_Marshall_]

I dunno I think we should just shoot them instead of banning the phones haha :laugh:

nah but seriosuly... they should be banned cuz there are wierdo ppl out there such as what Kali stated that will want to take pictures... don't ask me why but they just need some lovin...

[psychopatpl]

yep im not too fond of monopolies... even though im gonna probobly start up my own buisness in the future and it would be incredible not to have any competition.

thats why i bought a plain cellphone from a no name company, i dont use it as an mp3 player, i have my archos for that and i dont use it as a camera i have my fuji for that... so its all good.

i heard that the EU actualy ruled agains microsoft so that microsoft wouldnt be allowed to have the Windows Media Player bundled with windows, i find that just a little bit funny... but hey, every small battle counts.

[SpudNuts]

spud they will never lose...the will never win either, they will keep throwing money at it until the other side back down.....its how they have gotten away with it for years, and it being the government makes no difference.
The government can match the amount of money thrown at it if need be though. They won't but they have a moral obligation to uphold fair trade laws. They'll never get away with it, but I hear what you're saying. It'll just get lost in the courts for years.

[Weasel]

in some countries it requires a sound of a camera to play when you take the picture, its pretty loud like a ringtone but im sure they have ways around it...

My Samsung e715 has this..it's extremely loud and even plays when the phone is in silent mode! IMO there are legitimate situations where you want to take a picture without drawing the attention of the entire crowd/theatre/whatever. It's one of the few things I loathe about the phone.

[Mr Stabby]

The government can match the amount of money thrown at it if need be though. They won't but they have a moral obligation to uphold fair trade laws. They'll never get away with it, but I hear what you're saying. It'll just get lost in the courts for years.

best example...microsoft used to use sunn java systems, then afetr a lil while they ripped it off an packaged it as their own with changes....sunn took them to court...an that was many many years ago.something like 6 i think....anyway the government can't match it....they may have the high funds but they would need to draw from other departments to keep it going....I think in the end the government wuild push back from the table an call it a day..

[Jagged]

Yeah i know what you all mean, but they can come in handy for cool pictures, not sick ones. I think society does have to do something about it, because its becomming a problem..

[Dg]

Ive never really seen the point of camera phones, they're cool for about 10 minutes and after that you wonder why you bother'd. Some companies are banning them from employees because they are worried about sensitive data being photographed (dont they realise that far more sensitive info will fit on a DDS4 tape, and they fit in your shirt pocket which they cant legally search?).

Personally ive never had anyone take photos of me with a camera phone, probably coz im 6'3" and have a beard and bad temper, so I cant really relate. On the other hand, I remember coming across these the other month, a quick google found a load more:

http://www.mobog.com (hit the link saying Censored if ur over 18, then hit "most viewed")
http://www.mobileasses.com/display.php?mobilephone
http://legs.textamerica.com/
http://cleavage.textamerica.com/
etc.

N.B. These contain partial or total nudity, if u dont like it, dont look.

[psychopatpl]

wow that mobileasses one is crazy im pretty sure those people dont know their having their picture taken...

man but those are real women not pornstars so i can see how thats viewed as hot i guess... but wow thats really illegal and just possible because they dont show the faces of the people... damn thats pretty wild. well back to viewing threw the gallery ;-)

[Kali]

but the thing about the links dg posted is that these are people who have consented to having their picture taken and sent in [bar perhapsd the second link].

it's when they're taken without the person knowing, or against their will, that bothers me.

[Weasel]

I did a few minutes of research regarding US law and consent to be photographed. There havn't been any prevelant cases in the US so details are kind of fuzy, but it sounds like:

1) No matter what, the person who takes the picture owns the copyright

2) It is illegal if the photograph 1) can identify the subject AND 2) invades their privacy OR 3) is slanderous

3) It is legal if the photograph 1) is circulated for an ammount of time with their knowledge, implying consent OR 2) it was taken of the subject knowingly acting in public, also implying consent.