Slashdot Mirror
New Law Will Require Camera Phones To "Click"
An anonymous reader writes "A new bill is being introduced called the Camera Phone Predator Alert Act, which would require any mobile phone containing a digital camera to sound a tone whenever a photograph is taken with the phone's camera. It would also prohibit such a phone from being equipped with a means of disabling or silencing the tone."
I recall that Japan has a similar law, to prevent photos being taken of. . . things that Japanese men want to take pictures of, I guess.
Ninjas and pirates. How piquant.
This requirement is actually already in practice in Japan. In fact, Apple recently had to adjust the Japanese iPhone software to accommodate this. http://cultofmac.com/to-prevent-upskirts-japanese-iphone-3g-always-alerts-when-taking-photos/2356
Seriously. What. The. Fuck?
That annoying fucken' sound is the fist thing I fucken' disable when I get a new phone, simply because it pisses me off.
I've never taken "candid" photos, for which I'd need complete silence, I just don't like the extra noise. I disable my desktop sounds, as well. I'm just like that.
And at a concert or other public event? I've never heard someone's camera phone making noises (other than ringing) at one, but I know they're being used to take pictures. ... actually, I have been in situations where silence was golden. I have no drawing skills and needed to copy down a diagram my instructor had drawn on the whiteboard. My (instructor approved, so ling as it didn't disrupt the class) answer? Camera phone.
Not anymore, if this law passes!
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
It means nothing for open source or anything else because it is not a "New Law".
It is a bill, introduced by single Republican Congressman, and not co-sponsored by anyone. To become law it just needs the support of 215 more congress people, 50 senators and the President...
It means nothing except that Peter T. King (R-NY) is an idiot, a fact already well established, IMO.
Since any hacked camera will NOT make a sound ... will the cops randomly demand that people with camera-capable devices "demonstrate" that they click when a picture is taken?
The police will apparently have nothing to do with it.
The text of the bill
(b) Enforcement by Consumer Product Safety Commission- The requirement in subsection (a) shall be treated as a consumer product safety standard promulgated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission under section 7 of the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 2056). A violation of subsection (a) shall be enforced by the Commission under section 19 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 2068).
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
TFA even has a link to the bill's page at Thomas (which is the server that Congresspersons use to keep track of legislative business, and is open to the public). Current status is:
Also note that the bill's sole sponsor, Rep. Peter T. King (R-NY), does not sit on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The most likely scenario is that this bill will sit in committee until it quietly dies (a very common fate, I would add).
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
If you click the link, and then click the link on that link to the actual source, it's a bill introduced by Rep Peter T. King [NY-3] introduced 1/9/2009 with no cosponsors; referred to House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Most bills submitted to committees never get out of committee, espercially the ones with no co-sponsors, buried under the press of other stuff that congress can do which they think will actually get them votes. By introducing the bill he can tell the constituants that were lobbying for this "I introduced a bill in Congress to solve that very" and make it sound like he actually did something.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
How about this link instead? It has the membership of the 111th congress, not the 110th (as is linked by the parent). You have to click on the "Membership" tab. If you didn't read the parent, this is who is on the committee; find out if your representative is on the list and contact them.
You can track the bill here on Govtrack. If this gets past committee please write or call your representative and ask them to reject yet another unnecessary regulation.
In addition, if you live in New York's 3rd Congressional District, please remember how your representative wants to waste our tax dollars when you vote next year.
After doing a little more research on him, here's another very good reasons to vote him out. Quoting his campaign website:
Pete was a strong supporter of the PATRIOT Act, creating the Homeland Security Department, profiling for terrorists at airports and allowing the National Security Agency to wiretap foreign terrorists making telephone calls into our country.
Please vote this guy out.
"The Federal Reserve is a fraudulent system."--Lew Rockwell
End The FED. -
In the U.S. it's a class 3. It can easily take over 6 months to take possession of something like a silencer... then your application, even when granted by the Federal Gov't, will most likely be refused by the the local law enforcement; even after you've purchased the item, paid the $200 license fee, $100 holding fee, cost of the product, and $50-$100 to the sheriff to run his back ground check. They'll refuse it for some "public safety" reason in most municipalities. Oh, and you have to pay the licensing and holding fee for every product you purchase (silencer, high capacity firearm, short barrel shotgun, box of armor piercing ammunition, etc) so there's effectively a $300 tax on each item as a barrier to ownership as well.
Disclaimer: I don't own a single firearm, bullet, or even an axe. I don't think most people need them. But if we're going to have the right written in the constitution, then we shouldn't have barriers like this. Amend or get out of our way.
Similarly, as I understand it Obama isn't technically a naturalized citizen of the US, because of the details of the laws where he was born.
He isn't a naturalized citizen. He is a natural born citizen. The official records reflect a Hawaii birth. If that is true, he was born in the US to a mother that was a US citizen, and thus there is no question of his legality as a natural born citizen. However, there are people that assert he was born in Kenya. There is no evidence of this, other than a wish to have him declared ineligible to serve, and the fact that there isn't any evidence which eventually shows that there is a cover-up (incidentally, the Republican governor of HI would have to be in on it, as well as a number of foreign governments). Oh, and also, they are asserting that a minor mother can't convey citizen status to their child when foreign born, though I have not seen anything in US law establishing that, because if a child born abroad to a US citizen is a US citizen, then he is a natural born citizen as well.
The details of where he was born is that he was born in a US state (not a territory, HI was a state at the time) to a US citizen mother, and thus was a US citizen at birth, making him a natural born citizen, and thus eligible for the office of the President of the United States. There exists no document that has been released (by any side) which disputes this. And if he were born a Kenyan citizen and
Hillary Clinton's appointment as Secretary of State is blatantly unconstitutional (because the pay of that office was raised by congress during her current term).
I'm confused as to which part of the Constitution this is in violation of. I'm guessing you were listening to conservative talk show radio or something. The 27th Amendment says "No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened." There is no conceivable reading of that law which makes her appointment unconstitutional, but based on your wording, it's the only thing that seemed close. Perhaps you could share your reasoning on this. However, from the lack of details, but not lack of conviction, I'm guessing that you have no idea what was violated, other than someone once said it violated something, and you hate those Democrats. Or have you been bashing Bush solidly for the past 8 years for his numerous violations of the Constitution as well?
Learn to love Alaska