Comments on: Wisconsin police illegally delete college student’s photos

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 18 May 2010 08:02:53 +0000

I am an avid artist and photographer, i was photographing an oil refinery when i was stopped by the police. they told me that it was “illegal” and i was in “big trouble” they called four squad cars including the county sherif in on three 18yr old college students. we were on public property. i was then ordered to delete all my photos. my car was searched (trunk and all ) our IDs taken and backgrounds checked. we were then told that we were to be placed on a “terrorist watch list” and that we would be throughly investigated by Homeland Security! When we inquired further the police were very turse with us, we were not told what this list was except that they would know “everything about us” down to a “pimple on our heads”. they then said that we would “be contacted by homeland security” but they refused to say how or when. After doing more research and realizing how unreasonable this all is i am now wondering what i should do! plus i’m pissed they were absolutely phenomenal photos! i’m just a kid i feel bullied and scared! the way they threw around the word terrorism was just uncalled for! i am an artist i would never hurt anyone! can you guys help me out there is no way i’m going to take this lying down.

By: Sara

Sara — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 21:42:01 +0000

Duane~
Great photos. I feel like I’ve just been on a vacation to Mexico.

By: E Fizzle

E Fizzle — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:00:22 +0000

Just get some photo recovery software and quit whining.

By: Duane

Duane — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:53:52 +0000

I didn't think that HIPPA applied. I just wasn't absolutely sure. I've been down the road with trying to help someone and the hospital using HIPPA to prevent that. Of course they didn't offer the suggestion that the person sign something allowing them to give me the information I needed to help the person. I've found many of the privacy things in HIPPA to have set back patient care rather then advance it. Yet we are going down the same path with health care as I'm writing this. There are a bunch of errors in HIPPA that haven't been corrected yet and this time congress is taking another step to insure lots of errors. They aren't even bothering to read the bill before voting on it. So much for open government. My recent post Feb 1, 2006 Batopilias to San Isidro, Chihuahua

By: Duane

Duane — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:53:52 +0000

By: torgeaux

torgeaux — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 13:01:05 +0000

My take on HIPAA is that a doctor couldn’t take the picture and display it, but it doesn’t cover man on the street photography. Not sure, not my area.

By: Tom Joad

Tom Joad — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 08:13:23 +0000

HIPAA only applies to “Covered entities” which are medical providers that bill for their services, health plans, or a health care clearing house. So, HIPAA does not apply to citizens on the street. It also does not apply to the police or fire departments unless they bill for providing medical services. Of course they like to use it to limit information, kind of like so many use the Patriot Act as a reason to limit photography. It sounds convincing, but is actually not true.

By: Duane Kerzic

Duane Kerzic — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 05:11:53 +0000

The reason I asked him to cite the law was because there are some rules in HIPAA that are fairly wide reaching. I don’t believe however that these overstep that if you are seen in public you can be photographed. We also have no idea where Stan is from. He could be from some little town where the cops aren’t up on this stuff and do things that ‘seem perfectly legal” while they are not.

By: torgeaux

torgeaux — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 01:59:39 +0000

Stan: It’s been pointed out, but you’re flat wrong. If you can be seen from a public place, you can be photographed. Even in your home, by the way (there are some limits to this, but not what you may think). The journalists who gave up their cameras did so likely to get along, not from a legal obligation. They knew they could face contempt of cop charges, and it was easier to let it go. There is no law that says what you think it does, and if there were, it would be unconstitutional.