Tennessee photography ban

[rambone]

Maybe someone can help me make sense of this. It sounds an awful lot like Tennessee making it a misdemeanor to photograph strangers without their permission.



Tennessee General Assembly » Legislation

http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/107/Bill/SB2064.pdf

Tennessee SB 2064

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE:

SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-13-101(b), is amended by deleting subdivision (1) in its entirety and by substituting instead the following:

(1)
(A) Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision (b)(1), assault is a Class A misdemeanor; provided, that if the offense is committed against a law enforcement officer under this section, then the maximum fine shall be five thousand dollars ($5,000).
(B) Assault is a Class B misdemeanor if the offense is committed under subdivision (a)(3).

(C) Assault is a Class A misdemeanor if the offense is committed with the intent to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of any person except an elected official; provided, that the maximum fine shall be five thousand dollars ($5,000).

SECTION 2. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-13-302(b), is amended by adding the following language at the end of the subsection: except, that if the offense is committed with the intent to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of any person who is not an elected official, then the maximum fine shall be five thousand dollars ($5,000).

SECTION 3. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, Chapter 13, Part 6, is amended by adding the following as a new, appropriately designated section:
39-13-6__.
(a) As used in this section:

(1) "For a commercial purpose" means any act done with the expectation of a sale, financial gain, or other consideration. A visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression shall not be found to have been, or intended to have been captured for a commercial purpose unless it is intended to be, or was in fact, sold, published, or transmitted. "For a commercial purpose" does not include the transmission, post or display of a visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression on a social network;
(2) “Immediate family” means a spouse, child, step-child, brother, sister, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, parent, or grandparent;
(3) “Personal and familial activity” means an activity occurring on the property of the individual or the property of the individual's immediate family, and includes, but is not limited to, an activity involving interactions with the individual’s family or significant others or an activity involving other aspects of the individual’s private affairs; and
(4) "Social network" means any online community of people who share interests and activities, or who are interested in exploring the interests and activities of others, and which provides ways for users to interact.
​

(b) It is an offense for a person to knowingly capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of any person, except an elected official, engaging in a personal or familial activity under the following circumstances:

(1) The act was done in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable
person;
(2) The individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy; and
(3) The act was done 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.
​

(c) It is an offense for a person to knowingly spy upon, observe, or otherwise view any individual, other than an elected official, with the intent to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of the individual engaging in a personal or familial activity under the following circumstances:

(1) The act was done in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable
person;
(2) The individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy; and
(3) The act was done 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.
​

(d) If an offense under this section was committed for a commercial purpose, the defendant shall be subject to disgorgement to the individual of any proceeds or other consideration obtained as a result of the violation of this section; except, that this subsection (d) shall not apply to the following:

(1) Any person who transmits, posts, or displays a visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of an individual on a social network;
(2) Any Internet service provider operating a web site that offers a social network on which a visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of an individual is transmitted, posted or displayed; and
(3) Any telecommunications, broadband or other similar service provider acting solely as an intermediary for the transmission, posting or display of a visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of an individual on a social network.
​

(e) A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor and the maximum fine shall be five thousand dollars ($5,000).
(f) This section shall not be construed to impair or limit any otherwise lawful activities of law enforcement personnel or employees of governmental entities who, in the course and scope of their employment, and supported by reasonable suspicion, intend to capture or capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of a person during an investigation, surveillance, or monitoring of any conduct to obtain evidence of suspected illegal activity.
(g) Nothing in this section shall preclude prosecution under any other applicable offense.

SECTION 4. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-14-405(f), is amended by adding the following at the end of the subsection:
except, that if the offense is committed with the intent to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of an owner who is not an elected official, then the maximum fine shall be five thousand dollars ($5,000).

SECTION 5. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-14-407(a), is amended by adding the following at the end of the first sentence:
except, that if the offense is committed with the intent to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of a patron or customer, other than an elected official, of a business establishment located upon the property, then it is a Class A misdemeanor and the maximum fine shall be five thousand dollars ($5,000).

SECTION 6. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 55-10-205(d), is amended by adding the following language at the end of the subsection:
except, that if the offense is committed with the intent to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of another person who is not an elected official then it is a Class A misdemeanor and the maximum fine shall be five thousand dollars ($5,000);

 

[Love the 1911]

Sounds to me like its ok to commit voyeurism on elected officials

I'm kind of wondering what lead to this bill. Was someone taped having a sexual encounter in a vehicle? Perhaps a minor being photographed as they changed in the back of a car going to/from a sporting event(yes, it happened quite a few times in my youth)? The wording is strange and doesn't really specify how a crime would be committed under this criminal code unless voyeurism was perfectly legal last week there.

 

[E5RANGER375]

I dont think you should be allowed to video tape or photograph a citizen without their permission. now public servants...... yes, all day long.

If im out somewhere and someone doesnt heed my first warning to stop photographing me or my family (not like anyone would want a picture of me anyways, but), I would take their phone or camera and make them eat it.

 

[grimor]

I dont think you should be allowed to video tape or photograph a citizen without their permission. now public servants...... yes, all day long.

If im out somewhere and someone doesnt heed my first warning to stop photographing me or my family (not like anyone would want a picture of me anyways, but), I would take their phone or camera and make them eat it.

I'm gonna follow you around with a camera, I could use the money from suing you.

 

[rjstew317]

I'm gonna follow you around with a camera, I could use the money from suing you.

I'll come too! I want to see someone eat a camera

 

[E5RANGER375]

I'm gonna follow you around with a camera, I could use the money from suing you.

I hope you dont. cause im serious. your gonna have to wait with a bucket under your ass to retrieve your evidence, and I bet ****ting a cell phone isnt fun

 

[LEaSH]

I like to be watched. I'll wear something special.

 

[eldirector]

Sounds like an anti-voyeurism and pro-privacy law. Also seems to deal with "facebook bullying" a bit. Folks who are "in the public eye" are exempt.

They way I read it:
- you cannot photo/video someone who has a reasonable expectation of privacy
- you cannot photo/video someone for profit w/o their consent
- you cannot post photos/videos online without consent
- you CAN still take photos of folks "out and about", within reason, as long as they are in a public setting (e.g.: taking a picture at one of our 2A walks would be fine).

 

[rambone]

So basically everything in a celebrity magazine would become illegal.

Cameramen and journalists would be treated like terrorists and OCers.

I don't like the sounds of this.

 

[eldirector]

They way you describe it, I don't have a problem with it!

 

[mrjarrell]

Sounds like the not posting to YouTube bit might be there to protect certain public servants.

 

[grimor]

I hope you dont. cause im serious. your gonna have to wait with a bucket under your ass to retrieve your evidence, and I bet ****ting a cell phone isnt fun

cell phone? screw that, I'm bringing the Canon with the 75-300mm lens...

 

[rambone]

Free press is an essential part of a free society. As much as I detest a lot of what is on TV and magazines, it must be protected as freedom of the press.

Also: They only leave exception for "elected officials" -- not COPS.

 

[grimor]

- you cannot post photos/videos online without consent

so I guess you're going to need a lot of releases signed for crowd shots at concerts, fairs, protests, etc...
if you don't have an expectation of privacy (being in public) there shouldn't be a law against posting any picture for non-commercial purposes. Gonna have a lot of people suing facebook cause they're in the background of pictures.

 

[rambone]

if you don't have an expectation of privacy (being in public) there shouldn't be a law against posting any picture for non-commercial purposes.

There shouldn't be a law against if for commercial purposes either! Why destroy journalism and photography jobs? Unemployment not high enough?

 

[printcraft]

Don't want your picture taken?

Stay home, don't go out in public. Problem solved.

Why does everyone seem to need their butt wiped by daddy.gov?

 

[eldirector]

Free press is an essential part of a free society. As much as I detest a lot of what is on TV and magazines, it must be protected as freedom of the press.

Also: They only leave exception for "elected officials" -- not COPS.

I haven't read the entire amended section, just what you posted. That said, this talks specifically about "personal or familial activity" , not anything that happens in public. If you are worried about recording a traffic stop, I doubt that falls under "personal or familial".

I agree about the "free press", but only to the point that they become paparazzi and intrude into personal lives.

 

[ryknoll3]

What concerns me, is this seems to make it illegal to record or videotape a police officer in some type of encounter.

ie you turn on your audio recorder at a traffic stop.

 

[grimor]

There shouldn't be a law against if for commercial purposes either! Why destroy journalism and photography jobs? Unemployment not high enough?

by commercial I only mean advertising (can't take a picture of Brad Pitt outside his hotel and use it on a billboard for viagra type stuff) Journalism is protected by freedom of the press.

 

[jd4320t]

I dont think you should be allowed to video tape or photograph a citizen without their permission. now public servants...... yes, all day long.

If im out somewhere and someone doesnt heed my first warning to stop photographing me or my family (not like anyone would want a picture of me anyways, but), I would take their phone or camera and make them eat it.

I'm gonna follow you around with a camera, I could use the money from suing you.

I'll come too! I want to see someone eat a camera

I hope you dont. cause im serious. your gonna have to wait with a bucket under your ass to retrieve your evidence, and I bet ****ting a cell phone isnt fun

cell phone? screw that, I'm bringing the Canon with the 75-300mm lens...