Von Piros Hot Shots Quicky Pro

It's a public place and as long as your not a sex offender ( Piros is clean) you can take photos of whatever you like, have a look at the paps or the news journo, public property no problem..

How is this forum at the moment, half are a bunch of whinging grumpy ****ers.
Get over it

& piros can you run a few of those arse through photoshop to smooth them out... Keep the photos coming

dont worry about the haters Piros there always be there in all walks of life there just upset that there isnt pics of blokes arses in there for em to get excited over

From the point of view of what is legal or not Piro's doesn't seem to have done anything wrong here. The only concern could be if any of the subjects of the photo's are under 16.

The information below is from www.artslaw.com.au/information-sheet/street-photographers-rights/ which is a great legal resource for photographers. I run a portrait photography business, so as we use the images we take for commercial gain and they are generally of children this is an area that we take very seriously.

As for it being right or not, that is really only ever up to the subject. But any reasonable person at the Quiky standing in front of no less than 50 photogs lenses would assume they may end up in an image. Don't want your pic taken, there are many other places you could have been that day.

Taking photographs in a public place
It is generally possible to take photographs in a public place without asking permission. This extends to taking photographs of buildings, sites and people. There are, however, some limitations.

Photographing people
There are no publicity or personality rights in Australia, and there is no right to privacy that protects a person's image. Existing privacy laws are more concerned with storage and management of personal information and are of limited relevance to the present issue.

There is also currently no tort of invasion of privacy in Australia, but in ABC v Lenah Game Meats (2001) the High Court did not exclude the possibility that a tort of unjustified invasion of privacy may be established in the future. Based on this view, the Queensland District Court found in Grosse v Purvis (2003) that a tort of invasion of privacy had been made out on the facts and awarded the plaintiff damages. However, this case concerned a long history of harassment over many years and has limited application. As a result, taking photographs of people in public places is generally permitted.

Photographing people for a commercial purpose
If you are using your shots for a commercial purpose, such as for an advertising campaign, you should obtain a model release form signed by the subjects you are photographing to ensure you have authorisation to use their image to sell a product. See the Arts Law information sheet Unauthorised Use of Your Image for further information on defamation, passing off and trade practices law. A sample photographer's model release form is also available on the Arts Law Centre of Australia website.

Photographing people on private property
There is no restriction on taking photographs of people on private property frompublic property. According to Victoria Park Racing and Recreation Grounds Co Ltd v Taylor (1937) there is no freedom from view, so people who are photographed on their property from a public location have no legal claim against you if what is captured in the photograph can be seen from the street. The same applies to photographs taken from private land when you have permission to take photographs. You should be careful that you are not being a nuisance and interfering with someone's right to use and enjoy the land (see the case of BathurstCityCouncil v Saban (1985)).

Can taking photos be a criminal offence?
The Summary Offences Act 1988 (NSW) outlines a number of circumstances where a person's privacy must be respected. For example, it is an offence punishable by a fine or imprisonment to photographa person to provide sexual arousal or gratification if the person is undressed or engaged in a private act in circumstances where a reasonable person would reasonably expect to be afforded privacy, and he or she has not consented to being filmed. A private act includes using the toilet, bathing and engaging in sexual activities not ordinarily done in public. Similarly, the Surveillance Devices Act 1999 (Vic) and Surveillance Devices Act 1998 (WA) make it an offence to photograph a "private activity" without the consent of the subject.

The Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) also makes it an offence punishable with imprisonment to be in or near a building with intent to peep or pry upon another person. It is also an offence to stalk a person with the intention to cause fear of physical or mental harm. In serious cases, this may lead to an application for an apprehended violence order (AVO).

Also be aware that any photography construed as child pornography can result in criminal charges. For example, the Criminal Code 1899 (Qld) makes it an offence to take any "indecent" photograph of a child under the age of 16 without legitimate reason. You could face significant jail time, especially if the child is under 12. Similar provisions apply under the Criminal Code (NT), Criminal Code 1913 (WA), and the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA).

Very funny stuff, nothing wrong here folks move along.

Hey look at that thing up in the sky.... what the hell's that?

One for husq