A California legislator is pushing a bill that would require camera phones to emit a “distinctive noise or light” when snapping pictures, thus alerting those nearby that they may have been photographed. The bill highlights growing concerns over the social implications of camera phones in the United States.
“Everyone is going to have one of these (camera phones) in the next two years,” said Edward Randolph, a consultant for California Assemblymember Sarah Reyes (D-Fresno), the bill’s author.
Reyes’ bill, which was introduced earlier this year and is making its way through various committees, requires camera phones sold after Jan. 1, 2008, in California to emit an alert tone or light when a photograph is taken or transmitted. Randolph said the goal of the legislation is to help prevent camera-phone users from snapping illegal pictures.
Already, camera phones have come under scrutiny in the United States. A 25-year-old Austin, Texas, man was recently charged with “improper photography” for using his camera phone to take pictures under women’s skirts, according to a local report. Similar incidents have occurred in other parts of the world. In response, health clubs, government agencies and other organizations have begun banning camera phones specifically from bathrooms and changing areas. Indeed, officials in South Korea recently introduced regulations that would require camera phones to make loud sounds when taking pictures, a mandate set to take effect next year.
Most nations, including the United States, already have laws banning illicit photography, but the benign nature of camera phones combined with the capability to instantly transmit photos have raised additional privacy concerns.
“It being a crime doesn’t protect people before the fact,” Randolph explained. He said alert tones could discourage unlawful camera-phone pictures.
“If lawmakers want to mandate that camera phones emit an alert tone, they should also mandate that digital cameras emit alert tones,” said Alan Reiter, president of the Wireless Internet & Mobile Computing consulting firm. Reiter said tiny digital cameras or those with advanced zoom functions could represent an even greater privacy threat than camera phones. “There should be no reason to single out camera phones.”
Randolph said digital cameras typically look like cameras while camera phones are more discrete, although he said such technological innovations could require additional consideration.
