Ur reaction If ur pic ever appear in Stomp
-
still waiting for OM to walk the talk.. and give us a pic of him to make fun of
-
i will hunt him down, den stalk him.
every fcuk thing he do i take pic, add some retarded caption and make him look like a fool.
collect whole bunch den submit them at one go together -
Posting a photo that is not adulterated in any way does not amount to any accusation in the first place. Let the readers draw their own conclusion when they see you in the seat when there is an elderly lady struggling to keep her balance in the bus. You cannot make a case of defamation when the facts are supported by the photo in any case.
As for invasion of privacy, please quote the relevant statute, if you please. If you try to photograph fireice in her house, she can charge you for trespassing private property. If you discretely take a photo of her walking in the street or sitting in the bus, there is no law against that as long as you do it in a public place and you are not trying to direct your camera under her skirt. On the other hand, if you try to block her path and stalk her in an attempt to photograph her, it may be illegal if she can prove in court that such actions cause her distress and annoyance.
Please be clear about the law when you post. -
You should do an elective in law...will do you good.Originally posted by LazerLordz:On what grounds? Yours?
The libel statutes are nothing light..
-
Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:
Where did you get this idea from? Which laws?
Sue them for invading of privacy.
Take pictures for all you want to, but [b]under the laws here, minor or not, the person's face have to be censored if one did not obtain permission to take their pictures.
The problem is, faces are not censored. So they can be sued.
Not based on slander.[/b] -
I would, perhaps international law. It's more geared towards my rice bowl.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:You should do an elective in law...will do you good.
There is nothing illegal about taking pictures of people, but there is a fine line to be drawn about insinuation and fair comment. Just remember that. -
Originally posted by the Bear:
-
what if the comments in STOMP are defaming? can we use dat as a base for legal cases?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Posting a photo that is not adulterated in any way does not amount to any accusation in the first place. Let the readers draw their own conclusion when they see you in the seat when there is an elderly lady struggling to keep her balance in the bus. You cannot make a case of defamation when the facts are supported by the photo in any case.
As for invasion of privacy, please quote the relevant statute, if you please. If you try to photograph fireice in her house, she can charge you for trespassing private property. If you discretely take a photo of her walking in the street or sitting in the bus, there is no law against that as long as you do it in a public place and you are not trying to direct your camera under her skirt. On the other hand, if you try to block her path and stalk her in an attempt to photograph her, it may be illegal if she can prove in court that such actions cause her distress and annoyance.
Please be clear about the law when you post.
*juz asking for curiosity sake* -
give them a break la afterall they dunno their comp got spyware
-
beri chim lei
den wad if ppl take a pic of us, lets say in a bus slping
den accuss us of somethng which we are not
den it clearly state in stomp that we behave negatively
means we cant do anithing except to scold the person under comments in that website? -
I'll do this:
Rent a couple and a group of 20ppl. Then sit in the MRT carriage.
Then I ask the couple to hug.. Then who take pic= stomper
then me + 20 ppl point at the stomper and say owned!
Then take the stomper pic and post it in sgforums. -
Originally posted by Darkness_hacker99:I'll do this:
Rent a couple and a group of 20ppl. Then sit in the MRT carriage.
Then I ask the couple to hug.. Then who take pic= stomper
then me + 20 ppl point at the stomper and say owned!
Then take the stomper pic and post it in sgforums.
-
Cannot sue meh?
I thought law is ,if you are rich,sure can engage a good lawyer,go through the statues,sure can find sections,to sue one lah
If poor people like me ,one day pic appear in stomp,then no choice LL loh hahaha -
Frankly I think Singapore Seen is part of their efforts to promote "citizen journalism", which has to a point, make people more aware of themselves and their public behaviour. (case in point : Worrying abt NOT giving up seats to the eldery)
To a certain extent, I do not agree with their blantant posting of uncensored pictures, especially with regards to pictures with dubious headers.
My personal opinion of this : 1. Practise censorship. 2. Practise public etiquette. -
i will put a curse on em.
the mrt curse! -
Yup, I'd sue them too!Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Sue them for invading of privacy.
Take pictures for all you want to, but under the laws here, minor or not, the person's face have to be censored if one did not obtain permission to take their pictures.
The problem is, faces are not censored. So they can be sued.
Not based on slander.
-
*goes to check STOMP for misappropriate use of my picture*
-
Can't wait to see the first case being thrown out of court.Originally posted by LazerLordz:I would, perhaps international law. It's more geared towards my rice bowl.
There is nothing illegal about taking pictures of people, but there is a fine line to be drawn about insinuation and fair comment. Just remember that.
Unless you are as silly as CSJ, it's not easy to nail you for defamation if all you do is post photos of anti-social behaviour. -
There are legal criteria as to what constitutes defamation and what constitutes acceptable defences. If you want to learn how to defame someone, just watch CSJ.Originally posted by hiphop2009:what if the comments in STOMP are defaming? can we use dat as a base for legal cases?
*juz asking for curiosity sake*
If someone makes comments about you that are clearly false (and you have evidence to that effect) and those comments are designed to denigrate your character or standing in the eyes of those who have seen or heard those comments, then you have a case. Remember, if you take someone to court for defamation, you have the burden of proof. You've got to show evidence that the other party is in the wrong.
Posting a photo of someone jumping queue, smoking in a non-smoking area, or eating in the MRT train...that's all perfectly legal. If you add a comment, then you are making an interpretation of the photo...be careful that what you say is true, something CSJ has never learned. -
You might see it another way, if people take screenshots of your posts and they somehow end up on STOMP as part of "Oversea Graduates Say the Darndest Things."
Granted, some of the pictures in STOMP are great for curbing antisocial behaviour, but there needs to be proper checks and balances in place for preventing it from turning into Yellow Journalism. I'm all for shaming antisocial people... but if it starts becoming a case of catching otherwise normal people at their worst times just for the sake and sensation on it, that's another story entirely. -
but juz based on STOMP alone, how would u noe whether is dat person committing an anti-social behaviour or juz catching otherwise normal people at their worst time juz for the sake and sensation on it? in my opinion, it is difficult to judge, basically, if i were the editor of STOMP, it would be a terrible task for me, as it would not be possible for me to be at dat situation to judge whether the person has been framed or not.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:You might see it another way, if people take screenshots of your posts and they somehow end up on STOMP as part of "Oversea Graduates Say the Darndest Things."
Granted, some of the pictures in STOMP are great for curbing antisocial behaviour, but there needs to be proper checks and balances in place for preventing it from turning into Yellow Journalism. I'm all for shaming antisocial people... but if it starts becoming a case of catching otherwise normal people at their worst times just for the sake and sensation on it, that's another story entirely.
proper checks and balance? i really dont noe how. maybe u could list some examples so dat i would have a better idea? -
if my pic turns out nice, then i sua lor.
if ugly, then i will sue.
-
A hypothetical scenario:
If I put my large backpack on a bus seat next to me for a few seconds to take out something, any moron with a camera phone can simply snap a pic, post it on STOMP, and claim that I'm being inconsiderate. Then I get flamed till the cows come home.
Never mind if I put my bag on the floor soon thereafter and the bus is nearly empty anyway.
So if I'm in such a scenario, OM, would you still consider it as fair game?
If you were in such a scenario, OM, would you still be able to smile and laugh about it?
Just give me an honest and truthful answer. -
so free ah?Originally posted by casshern:i will hunt him down, den stalk him.
every fcuk thing he do i take pic, add some retarded caption and make him look like a fool.
collect whole bunch den submit them at one go together -
then stomp should censor them...since they did not censor the face... then u can sue them too lor ????Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Sue them for invading of privacy.
Take pictures for all you want to, but under the laws here, minor or not, the person's face have to be censored if one did not obtain permission to take their pictures.
The problem is, faces are not censored. So they can be sued.
Not based on slander.