A photographer secretly snapped strangers' text messages and turned them into art

[Coss 929]

 

Now if I'd done that, I'd be in Jail now, but I guess that this guy was quick enough, when caught, to say, "oh it's art!"

 

 https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/jeff-mermelstein-photographs-nyc-text-messages/index.html

 

[My Penis is hungry 311]

Interesting - you'd assume he'd have to get a model release surely or some form of permission - or it's his girlfriends

[khunsanuk 335]

Hi,

And how is this art?

Sanuk!
 

[Coss 929]

or he was quick enough, when caught, to say, "oh it's art!"

[Mekong 702]

But what law was broken? 
It’s not as if he hacked their phones or used James Bond style cameras to get the data, the people clearly had it on show. Creepy sure but illegal? 
Don’t claim Telecoms Consumer Protection Act since the messages were not intercepted, nor were the photos taken outside a military / government installation or up a woman’s skirt. With today’s mega pixel cameras is is possible to take an innocuous picture then zoom in later, Zoom in the SMS say.

Still not art mind and as creepy as fuck!

[My Penis is hungry 311]

2 hours ago, khunsanuk said:

Hi,

And how is this art?

Sanuk!
 

Art is very subjective

[My Penis is hungry 311]

54 minutes ago, Mekong said:

But what law was broken? 
It’s not as if he hacked their phones or used James Bond style cameras to get the data, the people clearly had it on show. Creepy sure but illegal? 
Don’t claim Telecoms Consumer Protection Act since the messages were not intercepted, nor were the photos taken outside a military / government installation or up a woman’s skirt. With today’s mega pixel cameras is is possible to take an innocuous picture then zoom in later, Zoom in the SMS say.

Still not art mind and as creepy as fuck!

In the USA it is legal to do street photography of people, however texts and other personal information is protected under privacy law and cannot be accessed in any way unless a warrent or order has been given.

 

It comes under also "Reasonable Privacy" where the person had expected privacy while doing something when photographed and "Invasion of Privacy"

 

It is also punishable under invasion of privacy laws 

 

Not sure why you would think it was ok?

 

It's a basic breach of privacy,

 

 

[Mekong 702]

Right to Privacy is applied differently for Privacy in the Home versus Privacy in Public.

A person's reasonable expectation of privacy can get a little trickier outside the home. Although someone may not have a right to seclusion when in the public view, the law can still protect people from being portrayed in a way that could be considered humiliating or from having their private details broadcast.

Why / How is using pictures of SMS illegal if no private details are released? 
 

Too many people go on about invasion of privacy and basic breach of privacy without fully understanding the laws (the same goes for any law), just because one thinks it’s a breach of privacy does not make it so.

https://www.findlaw.com/injury/torts-and-personal-injuries/what-is-the--reasonable-expectation-of-privacy--.html

PS You know me, always playing Devils Advocate. 

[khunsanuk 335]

Hi,

>Art is very subjective

Not to mention often pretentious.
Random person does some stupid stuff or creates something weird -> he gets ignored at best, ridiculed at worst
Famous artist does the exact same thing -> he gets lauded for being an art genius

Sanuk!
 

[paul101 74]

2 hours ago, My Penis is hungry said:

Art is very subjective

Most modern stuff is subjective rubbish