News: Sweden prohibits photographing private persons without their prior consent

[Cem_Usakligil]

This "explosive" news has just hit the Dutch papers and websites, I could not yet locate it in global sites such as the BBC or the New York Times.

Sweden is prohibiting (as per 1st of July) photographing (or filming) of private persons without their prior consent, even if the photos are taken during a birthday party in your own home! The news report the following, translated using Google:

Sweden prohibits from 1 July all (covert) photography or film in the private sphere, even if the images are taken on the street, in the garden or for example during birthday parties ​​at home.

Such pictures are only allowed when the people in the photo or video have given their prior consent. The Swedish government has ratified the bill for this on Thursday (today). From July 1, anyone who photographs people in Sweden without asking for permission first is risking a fine or imprisonment (up to 2 years).

Journalists and press photographers fear that the new law will be used to their watchdog function and thus curb press freedom. Formally, the law makes an exception for news, but according to the Swedish journalists union, the conditions are unclear.

The Swedish government wants to prevent with this new photography law that the private lives of its citizens are just shared via internet, for example Twitter, Facebook and YouTube with everyone else. Also visually capturing and publishing harassment on the street is covered by the law.

Honestly, I am flabbergasted.

 

[Maggie Terlecki]

Cem,
I know that last December, they were drafting a law banning photographing people in very private situations without their knowledge, such as the shower, restroom, bathrooms. Allowances were to be made for news photographers. This morning, I've been checking through the Swedish newspapers, and could not find that any law had been passed. I have a friend in Sweden. I'll ask him if he has heard anything.

 

[Michael Nagel]

Thanks for bringing this up - this hasn't hit the news here in Germany yet.

It would be interesting to read the original text, but swedish is not among the laguages I speak, so I am curious if there is a translation available soon.

The regulation here in Germany permits photography in public places, but requires consent for publication (with exceptions for news and some other situations like crowd etc.). This seems a good compromise, even if it has fairly reduced street photography.

As I do not know the exact content I can only speculate now, but besides the questions/concerns raised by the Swedish Journalists Union there a few more where I would like to see answers:
Is the 'no people at all' to be understood by the letter or does it even apply to people who may appear far away in the landscape and who cannot be reporduced in a recognizable way from the image?
Will investigators have to apply for a license to shoot (pictures of) people?
Will the speedcams disappear? I don't see any consent here
How does this regulation correlate with the Swedish CCTV regulation?

The aim is to protect privacy - I am OK with the intent, but I see a better point to put the barrier at the step towards publishing.

Anyone from Sweden or living there who can comment on this?

Best regards,
Michael

 

[Asher Kelman]

What immediately comes to mind is the private ad hoc recording of crimes or police brutality. The pictures taken of The Rodney King beating had a major effect on our society. The use of security cameras helps track criminals robbing stores and helped to catch the terrorists who massacred innocents in London, New York and Boston.

I see this as a major loss to freedom. Without witnessing and evidence, governments and criminals have freedom to hurt us.

Asher

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Other resources have started to pop up all over by now. Here is a Swedish link, translated automatically by Google: http://translate.google.com/transla...sverige/ny-lag-kan-forbjuda-smygfotografering

It seems that the initial Dutch news were not very accurate. The law is apparently specifically against surreptitious photography in private spaces. The link above says:

The law of insulting shooting will come into effect July 1, 2013 For criminal liability required:
- To shoot or filming is done illegally.
- That shooting is done in secret, the subject (the camera is hidden or that the victim sleeping for example)
- It being filmed or photographed is on a "private" place, that is, in a residence, in a restroom or in a dressing room, for example.

Exceptions are made for an act that is considered justifiable. It may be, for example photography or filming in a news intermediary purpose or in any other societal interest.

The penalty is proposed to be a fine or imprisonment not exceeding two years.

So perhaps this is a specific law against paparazzi or the bullying done by youth at schools, etc.

 

[nicolas claris]

To this kind of restrictive law, I suggest these guys to have more smiles into their mind.
To this I oppose:

These Bengalis people​

 

[Asher Kelman]

Other resources have started to pop up all over by now. Here is a Swedish link, translated automatically by Google: http://translate.google.com/transla...sverige/ny-lag-kan-forbjuda-smygfotografering

It seems that the initial Dutch news were not very accurate. The law is apparently specifically against surreptitious photography in private spaces. The link above says:



So perhaps this is a specific law against paparazzi or the bullying done by youth at schools, etc.

Seems to make much more sense, Cem!

Can't imagine that they'd want to get rid of security cameras in the shopping malls or stop reporting for TV news! The main thing to safeguard is the right of citizens to photograph police and whatever else they like. That protects citizen freedoms. Proclaiming "The Rights of Man" is one thing, but we need to guard our ability to report on what concerns us, to do that, we need unlimited rights to film in public. Of course, this does not include license to block other people from walking freely or frighten old ladies and children.

Asher