Wisconsin Court Affirms Privacy Rights of Nude People

[Knightskye]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081230/ap_on_re_us/video_voyeurism

Only the government can film you in your - or someone else's - bedroom.

[acptulsa]

Cool. So, now I don't have to tell you if I'm nude right now.

[Truth Warrior]

Under our clothes, we're ALL nude. YAY, privacy rights. :D

[RCA]

The Fourth Amendment +1

[Knightskye]

Under our clothes, we're ALL nude. YAY, privacy rights. :D

You say interesting things. :)

[John of Des Moines]

Yeah, here in Iowa the Iowa Supreme Court just upheld the conviction of a husband (now ex husband) who videotaped his wife in the bedroom.

[satchelmcqueen]

i am nude right now

[Matt Collins]

Isn't this a waste of time since it's too cold up there for that sort of thing?!?!

[Knightskye]

Isn't this a waste of time since it's too cold up there for that sort of thing?!?!

Too cold to... do things in your toasty house with your girlfriend?

[ShannonOBrien]

lol at the voyeur dissenting judge.

[Matt Collins]

Too cold to... do things in your toasty house with your girlfriend?Girlfriend!??! :confused: You must be new here...:rolleyes:

[Knightskye]

Girlfriend!??! :confused: You must be new here...:rolleyes:

Hey, your personal life is none of my business.

You said it was "too cold" up there, though.

[Matt Collins]

You said it was "too cold" up there, though.I accidentally went to a nude beach once in Florida. It was horrible... dirty old men and fat old women.... none of which I want to see... but I am sure it'd be even worse if the weather was cold :(

[danberkeley]

This ruling is totally anti-private property rights. The girl should have told her man that he cannot videotape/whatever her before hand. This is what pro sports does at stadiums. Btw, now no one will date or be naked or have sex with that dude for doing what he did. However, this does create a false sense of privacy because now these idiot girls will assume that they are not being videotaped/whatever because it is illegal. Ha! Expect a surge in voyeurismdom.

[danberkeley]

I accidentally went to a nude beach once in Florida. It was horrible... dirty old men and fat old women.... none of which I want to see... but I am sure it'd be even worse if the weather was cold :(

I hear the european ones are better.

[Knightskye]

This ruling is totally anti-private property rights.

She isn't his property.

[danberkeley]

She isn't his property.

Lolz. Let's try this one more time. The guy can do whatever he wants with his videocamera and audio recording devices as long as he does not violate the non-initiation of force axiom, etc. Pretty good juxtaposition tho.

[Truth Warrior]

You say interesting things. :) Ya oughta see the ones I don't say. :D

Thanks! ;)

[Matt Collins]

I just finally RTFA and saw what this case was really about.

Regarding the Mark Jahnke case mentioned in TFA I would say that the ruling was bad based upon the fact that people who get naked in front of others don't have an expectation of privacy. And filming is no big deal. HOWEVER, there should've been an extension of that, if the film was recorded in private, than distributing or displaying the film in a non-private setting should be against the law. In other words its not the act of filming while in private, it's the act of making that film public without the permission of the people in the film who were filmed in private with an expectation of privacy.

[SeanEdwards]

Lolz. Let's try this one more time. The guy can do whatever he wants with his videocamera and audio recording devices as long as he does not violate the non-initiation of force axiom, etc. Pretty good juxtaposition tho.

The woman has a reasonable expectation to not be secretly videotaped by her boyfriend while having sex and then find the video being distributed on the internets. The boyfriend is committing an aggressive crime against the woman by means of deception. Property rights do not excuse criminal acts just because they happen on private property.

[SeanEdwards]

Sex is such a minefield these days. I can just a imagine a scenario where some poor shlub gets a girl pregnant, while being videotaped, and then finds out he caught AIDS during the encounter too.

I think I should just cut off my penis as a precautionary measure.

[libertarian4321]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081230/ap_on_re_us/video_voyeurism

Only the government can film you in your - or someone else's - bedroom.

Yeah, but the government isn't cool- they never post those vids to Redtube- they keep the good stuff for themselves.

[danberkeley]

I just finally RTFA and saw what this case was really about.

Regarding the Mark Jahnke case mentioned in TFA I would say that the ruling was bad based upon the fact that people who get naked in front of others don't have an expectation of privacy. And filming is no big deal. HOWEVER, there should've been an extension of that,
if the film was recorded in private, th[e]n distributing or displaying the film in a non-private setting should be against the law. In other words its not the act of filming while in private, it's the act of making that film public without the permission of the people in the film who were filmed in private with an expectation of privacy.

What he did was certainly un-gentleman-li-like, but now you are dictating what he can and cannot do with his property (the videocamera et al.). The "rights" you want to impose violate the guy's private property rights. Now, if they had agreed that what they were doing (el sexo and el nakedness) was to be private, then what they did should not have been made public. It would have been a simple contract/agreement. Btw, would your proposal also apply to someone making an oil painting of his naked girlfriend without her knowng about it?

[SeanEdwards]

What if the guy didn't videotape the woman, but instead painted her nude from memory, or described her sexual preferences or behavior in a blog? Would that violate the woman's expectation of privacy? :confused:

[danberkeley]

The woman has a reasonable expectation to not be secretly videotaped by her boyfriend while having sex and then find the video being distributed on the internets.

If they had agreed to that, sure. I do not know the particulars of that specific matter.


The boyfriend is committing an aggressive crime against the woman by means of deception.

You mean fraud?


Property rights do not excuse criminal acts just because they happen on private property.

Was what he did a criminal act before he did it? Or did it become a crime when the judge said it was? Nice juxtaposition on my application of private property. I was not saying that he had a right to do what he did because they were on private property, instead, I said he had a right to do what he did with his property(i.e. the video camera, et al.) because it is his property.

[danberkeley]

What if the guy didn't videotape the woman, but instead painted her nude from memory, or described her sexual preferences or behavior in a blog? Would that violate the woman's expectation of privacy? :confused:

Or if he described what he did with his gf to his bestfriend? Would that violate the woman's expectation of privacy?

[Knightskye]

Lolz. Let's try this one more time. The guy can do whatever he wants with his videocamera and audio recording devices as long as he does not violate the non-initiation of force axiom, etc. Pretty good juxtaposition tho.

Doesn't she have to be aware that there's a camera there for it not to be a violation of privacy?

[TastyWheat]

Well, when citizens violate your rights is that a criminal issue or a civil issue?

If somebody threatens you or blackmails you into doing something is that involuntary servitude?

If you're in somebody's house and you get kicked out without warning for using explicit language is that a violation of free speech?

If somebody has a security camera in their house (living room only) and they didn't tell you before hand is that a violation of privacy?

I can't really explain why I think it's alright for a person to have a camera in his/her house and it's not alright for the government to have cameras everywhere except the inside of people's houses. However, I think when you enter into someone else's house your privacy is at their discretion. Violation of that should be subject to a civil suit.

[danberkeley]

If somebody threatens you or blackmails you into doing something is that involuntary servitude?

Blackmail, you say?
See here: http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/15_2/15_2_2.pdf
And here: http://www.walterblock.com/publications/legalizing_blackmail.pdf
And here: http://www.walterblock.com/publications/blackmail_extortion_exchange.pdf


If you're in somebody's house and you get kicked out without warning for using explicit language is that a violation of free speech?

What do you mean by "violation of free speech"? Are you asking if it violates the Constitution?


If somebody has a security camera in their house (living room only) and they didn't tell you before hand is that a violation of privacy?

What if you describe a suspect to a cop? Is that a violation of the suspect's privacy?