Iwate tries to crack down on upskirt photos taken with cell phones

Thank you. My only point all along.

No. Your 'point' seems to be if someone takes an upskirt of a woman, it is the woman's fault because of what she is wearing. I think you are wrong.

I'm glad you finally see it.

As I said, unlike you, I have never seen it.

It is exactly what is being discussed in the article.

No. The police are very clear that they are trying to prevent people taking 'nasty photos'.

Your attempt to twist it into something it isn't is as puzzling as your support for criminalizing the simple act of "pointing a cellphone".

Learn to read. I said above that I am not convinced that this is the correct approach to solving the problem of people taking these kinds of photos. You know, when I wrote above that 'I was not sure that it was the correct approach'?

I'll ignore the rest of the pc-jj.

Yeah, right. Caring about the victim is just so much 'pc' until you are the victim. Instead, you will attempt to insult others that you disagree with as you did above. Way to take the high road.

That is not 'upskirt'. That is visible underwear.

Thank you. My only point all along. I'm glad you finally see it.

It is not the same thing as what is being discussed in the article.

Wrong. It is exactly what is being discussed in the article. Your attempt to twist it into something it isn't is as puzzling as your support for criminalizing the simple act of "pointing a cellphone". But both are duly noted. I'll ignore the rest of the pc-jj.

always surprised when somebody disagrees with them.

I am not surprised someone disagrees with me. I am surprised you are blaming the people that are the victims of a crime. I am further surprised others agree with that. It isn't a giant surprise. Just a little one. You are perfectly within your rights to have opinions I disagree with as are those who agree with your opinions.

It is an invasion of privacy, but its not an assault.

An invasion is an assault. This invasion of privacy certainly feels like an assault to the victims of it, too. No reason to belittle it.

In addition, this article (and therefore this discussion) is not about people "going out of their way" to photograph underwear.

Actually, it is. It says so right in the article:

criminalize pointing a cell phone toward someone if it is suspected the would be photographer is trying to get an upskirt picture.

The suspected intent is to take the upskirt photographs. That is going out of your way. The people that have been arrested for doing this crime did in fact go out of their way.

Pointing is not the same as "going out of ones way", so please don't muddy the waters with pc jibber jabber.

Pointing is the same as going out of your way if the intent is to take the upskirt photos. Being assaulted is not 'pc jibber jabber', neither is having some feelings for the victims. You should give it a try.

Nobody is defending a creep with a camera in his shoe or a guy following school girls up the escalator. Book them and fine them heavily if you can catch them.

Good, you should stop here, then.

My only point in this discussion has been that there are plenty of people who dress in such a way that their underwear becomes easily visible to anyone around many many times a day.

That is not 'upskirt'. That is visible underwear. It is not the same thing as what is being discussed in the article. Also, you keep making the incorrect assumption that all victims of upskirt photos are wearing the same kinds of clothing. However, news articles beg to differ with this. Anyway, people should be free to wear what they want without having their privacy assaulted or violated and no excuses should be made for this crime.

Now you have people "reaching under their clothing" to take pictures. This discussion is not about such obvious criminal acts that are certainly covered by current law.

No, I think this article is talking about exactly those types of crimes and other ways to catch the people doing them. From the article:

Police say that they want to “expand” their approach to catching perverts sneaking naughty photos

So, the police's intent is quite clear here. The discussion is about whether this approach is the correct one or not. I am not sure because it is not clear exactly what actions would be actionable.

So you like to leer, you just don't take a picture

I also think fluffy bunnies are cute, too. I also think a lot of cars are attractive, too. That does not mean I 'leer' at them.

And I feel uncomfortable when someone is showing their underwear in an obvious manner in the public space.

Wow, you must be looking a lot more closely than you are trying to let on because I have to confess I have never seen anyone's underwear in public. Not even once.

This article is about "pointing a cellphone". It is not about assaults or attacks. I urge you to read it.

I urge you to take your own advice. This article is about a proposed method for dealing with people who take upskirt photos and the reactions to it by some people on the internet. I also suggest you tone down your rhetoric and your suppositions about others.

I am actually surprised that you have received some support for this statement.

Sure sign of an "open-minded" person .... always surprised when somebody disagrees with them.

Going out of your way to photograph under a person's skirt is certainly an assault on another person's privacy.

It is an invasion of privacy, but its not an assault. Don't throw that word around so cheaply, it loses its meaning when people use it to describe events that are nothing like an assault. It also trivializes the suffering of real victims of an assault.

In addition, this article (and therefore this discussion) is not about people "going out of their way" to photograph underwear. Indeed, the problem specified in the article seems to be that the proposed law doesn't specifically define any useful line in that regard. If I take a picture of a fountain and a lady in a mini skirt sitting along the edge of the fountain chooses that moment to cross her legs, have I just taken an upskirt? The article says that Iwate plans to "criminalize pointing a cell phone toward someone if it is suspected the would be photographer is trying to get an upskirt picture". Pointing is not the same as "going out of ones way", so please don't muddy the waters with pc jibber jabber.

Nobody is defending a creep with a camera in his shoe or a guy following school girls up the escalator. Book them and fine them heavily if you can catch them. My only point in this discussion has been that there are plenty of people who dress in such a way that their underwear becomes easily visible to anyone around many many times a day. They must be aware of this, yet they choose to continue dressing the same way. My favorite one is when you see girls clutching their handbags to the back of their legs as they ascend stairs or escalators. How inconvenient must it be to do that all day long ... yet they keep wearing skirts so short they barely cover their bottoms. What's the advantage there if your intention isn't to show your legs, bottom and underpants to the world day in and day out? And if that is the intention, what could it possibly matter if someone took a picture one day? Given the wording used in this article (pointing a cellphone) it would be easy to take pictures of underwear all day long without ever "going out of the way" to do so.

Why stop there? Why not have all women wear a burqa? People should be able to wear what they want within the legal parameters without people reaching under their clothing to take photos.

Re the bolded: see how you over-state the discussion? Now you have people "reaching under their clothing" to take pictures. This discussion is not about such obvious criminal acts that are certainly covered by current law. This discussion is about just pointing a phone in someone's direction ... someone who may like to dress in short skirts, and may or may not like to show their underwear, but doesn't want anyone taking a picture of their underwear - even if its just by chance.

Personally, I find mini-skirts and plunging necklines quite attractive. Why should this attractive fashion be stopped because some criminals cannot control themselves?

So you like to leer, you just don't take a picture. How commendable. Personally I dislike the leering at least as much. And I feel uncomfortable when someone is showing their underwear in an obvious manner in the public space. Have some class ffs. Have some dignity. Please tell me what could possibly be the motivation to flaunt your underpants the way some folks do these days. Is it to titillate people like you who find "plunging necklines quite attractive? Is it to show the world what an (un)impressive rack you have? If not, why not wear something more comfortable and less revealing?

What's next? Blaming attacks on women on what they are wearing? Oh, never mind. That is what I already see in some of the posts here.

Sigh. Once again. This article is about "pointing a cellphone". It is not about assaults or attacks. I urge you to read it.

Oh please. We aren't talking about an assault. We aren't even talking about laying a hand on anyone. We are talking about someone (admittedly probably a pervert) taking a picture of someone else in a public place.

I am actually surprised that you have received some support for this statement. Going out of your way to photograph under a person's skirt is certainly an assault on another person's privacy.

If you're going to wear miniskirts or plunging necklines, you are inviting the type of attention this article talks about.

Why stop there? Why not have all women wear a burqa? People should be able to wear what they want within the legal parameters without people reaching under their clothing to take photos.

Personally, I find mini-skirts and plunging necklines quite attractive. Why should this attractive fashion be stopped because some criminals cannot control themselves? What's next? Blaming attacks on women on what they are wearing? Oh, never mind. That is what I already see in some of the posts here.

Blame the criminal, not the victim.

Long(er) skirts would be more demure. Pants on young women would be too masculine, especially in this highly gendered society.

Ehh, if the skirts weren't so short that someone could take a picture of underwear without obviously leaning over, then maybe more of these unscrupulous people could be properly targeted by police without having to pass laws about merely holding a smartphone in public.

If you're going to wear miniskirts or plunging necklines, you are inviting the type of attention this article talks about. While that wouldn't eliminate all the idiots (you'd still have the nimrods with cameras in bags sitting on the ground), you'd deter all but the most degenerate.

I still say the schools should move to a pants suit design for girl's uniforms. That would eliminate a whole category of illegal up-skirt photo-taking. The only "school girl up-skirt photos" after such a change would have to be with the girl's permission, as she would have to change from her school uniform into something with a skirt. I imagine the manga and anime communities would howl at such a proposal, though.

Likewise I could say that any person who parades around the town revealing their underwear "has a psycho-sexual disorder and needs professional help".

Any man that takes a upskirt photo is a severely confused adult who cannot control his passion and commited a crime. He is a sex offender that has a psycho-sexual disorder and needs professional help. If I ever catch a guy upskirt me, he would instantly become fair game for me, shoes in his crotch.

Excellent.

I say those perverts brought it on themselves... You guys dont know how nerve wrecking it is for us to wear skirts and be afraid that some pervert is taking pictures while we are walking up the stairs or just standing in a train station or on a bus or something. And you can down vote me all you want but you guys will never understand.

Any man that takes a upskirt photo is a severely confused adult who cannot control his passion and commited a crime. He is a sex offender that has a psycho-sexual disorder and needs professional help. If I ever catch a guy upskirt me, he would instantly become fair game for me, shoes in his crotch.

I have the shutter sound as my notification tone these days. Confuses the hell out of people.

Stay on topic please.

ThonTaddeo

I had not considered the position of those with "stigmata" (a term used by Goffman) but yes I can definitely appreciate the point. Fascinating about Lafcardio Hearn. All his photos are looking right except one where both of his eyelids are shown half closed.

This issue seems to me -Westerner that I am - to have more bearing on use rather than on taking. For example, if someone took a picture of my bald head because they liked pictures of bald heads for personal use, then I would not mind. Even if they hated bald heads and wanted a photo of my head to throw darts at, I would not mind. I personally do not mind about journalistic, or artistic uses either but then the stigma on baldness is not nearly as bad as on droopy eyes.I would mind if they used my picture with a caption "Nayami Muyo" "Get over your fears/phobias/complexes and get a wig today." Indeed there was a US lawsuit where a balding male model was used in such a way and received a lot of damages (or he may have been overweight?).

On the other hand though there is the issue (is it an issue?) of photographer's rights. For example I see that photographers in the UK seem keen to keep their right (as they see it) to photograph people http://www.sirimo.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/ukphotographersrights-v2.pdf I see that British law is moving towards Japanese law. E.g. at the end of the section on harrassment and invasion of privacy in the above document it says

For images of people in public places, the key seems to be whether the place is one where a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy and the courts have greatly extended the areas where this might be the case. A court has held that the right of privacy of a child might be infringed by the taking and publishing of a photograph of him with his parents in a public street. Privacy actions in the UK have been concerned with publication rather than simply the taking of a photograph, but a recent decision of the ECHR (European Court of Human Rights) suggest that simply taking a photograph may, in some circumstances, infringe the right. Photographers are therefore advised to be careful when taking photographs intended for some kind of publication, even when the subject is in a public place.

I am sure that upskirt photography would be considered an invasion of privacy and possibly harassment too but I see that the UK is particularly staunch in its protection of photographers, and weak in its protection of privacy http://tinyurl.com/lmwgsmn

Close your legs or lengthen your skirt. How about that? Id be more concerned about mini cameras on shoes. No need for a law. Youd have to prosecute numerous photographers who work for those celebrity loving mags that print upskirt undie shots.

"Don't drop your phone in a public place in Iwate you would be arrested for taking up photos"

This thing takes videos: so if you drop it while taking videos, and if the lens happens to face up, and if a crowd (including skirt wearing females) happen to walk over it, and someone pick it up and see the content and turn it in to police, there will be problem--did you accidentally drop it, or did you intentionally place it there?

Timtak, thanks for mentioning what I feel are some of the most civilized, dignity-ensuring laws in the world: those which enshrine one's right not to be photographed in ways they do not desire.

In the past, people weren't subject to the indignity of undesired photography. Two good examples of this are Lafcadio Hearn, the legendary compiler of Japanese stories, and US president Franklin Roosevelt. Hearn had some reason to not want people photographing his left side (a disfigurement of some kind; a lazy eye; who knows?) and today we only see photos of the side he wished to show us. President Roosevelt was in a wheelchair, but was always photographed from the waist up, so that his handicap was not on display.

These days it's become impossible to retain one's dignity in this manner. Full-face photographs are mandatory for most identification papers, including passports, and a non-national cannot enter Japan without having one's face photographed while fingerprints are being taken. If you have a scar or burn on your face or a problem with your eye, too bad; you no longer get to tell the passport agency or motor vehicle department to shoot your "good side".

And I find such things to be disrespectful to people who already struggle just to live with these handicaps and disfigurements. The least we can do is afford them the right to refuse to have such things photographed.

Just because something is visible, whether that's a girl's underwear or a man's handicap, doesn't mean that anyone should be able to take a photo of it that will -- in today's digital world -- outlive the person it was taken of. I support Japan's "image rights" and want to see them be a worldwide standard.

How can you accidentally take an upskirt photo?

There would no longer be upskirt photos once there are no skirts to block the way!

Just food for thought.

Don't drop your phone in a public place in Iwate you would be arrested for taking up photos

What will they do if a girl takes her own up-skirt photo of herself? Arrest her for sexual harassment to herself?

We aren't talking about an assault.

Actually, yes we are. It is an assault on many levels, and it is illegal.

you lose the right to complain about someone else gawking at it.

We are not talking about gawking though. We are talking about taking photos.

Personally I don't want anyone gawking at or taking a picture of my underwear so I dress in such a way as to make that virtually impossible.

That is your choice to wear what you want. I don't think it is unfair to afford the same freedoms to others. Some past news stories have talked about people wearing cameras or mirrors on their shoes to look or take photos. Short or not, it should not matter. People should not be doing these things and it is not the victim's fault.

Its not really that hard.

It should not be that hard to leave others alone either. Blaming people for what they wear is the wrong approach in my opinion and sends the message that it is not the criminal that is at fault, but the victim.

Why can't we not blame the victims? This would help.

Oh please. We aren't talking about an assault. We aren't even talking about laying a hand on anyone. We are talking about someone (admittedly probably a pervert) taking a picture of someone else in a public place. If that's illegal in Japan (as others posting here seem sure it is) then its illegal and that's the end of the discussion.

But setting that aside for a moment and looking at the issue from a common sense viewpoint, surely you can see that if your underwear is visible to people in the public space then you lose the right to complain about someone else gawking at it. A remedy for the problem is clearly available ... don't show your underwear in public. Personally I don't want anyone gawking at or taking a picture of my underwear so I dress in such a way as to make that virtually impossible. Its not really that hard.

why cant the ladies and school girls ware slightly longer skirts?

Why can't we not blame the victims? This would help.

why cant the ladies and school girls ware slightly longer skirts? this would help.

Dear Mr. Takano

Well obviously it's illegal if you do something wrong like taking inappropriate photos of others secretly. But taking pictures of others in public is not illegal.

I am not sure what you mean by "inappropriate" but in Japan it is always inappropriate if the model does not give permission for the photograph to be taken. In the UK I can take people's photos whether they give permission or not.

Japanese people own their own image so taking photographs of Japanese people is always illegal unless they give their permission even if they are in a public place. Please see the following paper (by a former colleague) http://tinyurl.com/shouzouken

Obviously if one is given permission to take someone's photo then that does not infringe any law. Generally people do not give permission to strangers so the only other way is to take photographs secretly, which does infringe the law.

If you take pictures of others in the background that can be acceptable without there approval but as soon as you focus upon them, even at a festival, then their approval is required. Permission does not need be verbal - if the model sees the camera and poses that is enough. Sometimes when photography is obviously taking place, e.g. in the case where a magazine cameraman was taking photos at a spa, some non-verbal expression of not wanting ones photo taken may be required.

I am not saying that one can never take photos in the street in Japan (and perhaps that is what you are thinking I am saying, since you are Japanese and surely know the law) but the basic rules in Japan is that one needs approval to TAKE photos even in a public place. This contrasts with Germany and I believe the UK (my country) and USA, where, as far as I know, one can take photographs of people on the street and in public places, as much as you like, without asking for permission. The important thing is that you do not use the photos inappropriately, such as for commercial gain.

Clearly the police are idiots and understand nothing about what "deleting" a file means

Although you make a good point, you ruin it with this sentence. Just because someone does not understand something, does not make them an 'idiot'. You should consider toning it down a bit.

I remember a report here where a guy that was caught snapped the phone in half. However, even there, the recovery software you mentioned might be able to get the data out, especially if it were saved on a memory card of some sort instead of the internal memory of the phone.

Currently under Iwate law, taking photos of someone’s underwear without their knowledge is only illegal if law enforcement have proof that a picture is taken. In the day and age of easily deletable digital pictures, police say that it is too easy for these panty paparazzi to erase the evidence.

... Clearly the police are idiots and understand nothing about what "deleting" a file means. The file is still there on the phone until it is over-written with new data. If the perp hits delete then just take the phone and run some basic retrieval software and the file will reappear... and you get to add a charge of "destruction of evidence" or "obstruction of justice" to their charge sheet

You wouldn't think it was that easy to take a photo of someone's underwear. Stop wearing skimpy skirts and cross your legs when you sit down.

So stupid, you can't arrest someone before they commit a crime, police need to do their jobs rather than passing laws to make their job easier.

No, I am pretty sure it is illegal under the law against, "tousatsu"(盗撮) stealing a photo, which is a criminal offense but as explained in the article is prosecutable only if a photo of the other is found in the camera. Newspapers, TV companies and other media are given special dispensation. And gaijin are often forgiven because they don't know.

Well obviously it's illegal if you do something wrong like taking inappropriate photos of others secretly. But taking pictures of others in public is not illegal.

Their excuse is すまほん！

WAY too easy to abuse if this becomes law. Knee-jerk legislation at its worst!

This is a funny news.

It's not illegal, but they can get into various troubles like getting sued. No, I am pretty sure it is illegal under the law against, "tousatsu"(盗撮) stealing a photo, which is a criminal offense but as explained in the article is prosecutable only if a photo of the other is found in the camera. Newspapers, TV companies and other media are given special dispensation. And gaijin are often forgiven because they don't know.

Legs are beautiful! Show them, don't hide them!

They are also the only country in the developed world where it is illegal to take photos of others even in a public place.

It's not illegal, but they can get into various troubles like getting sued. I don't think that the police actually has any legal authority but they may bug photographers for taking photos of others.

The Japanese are wild about photography of people, making all the best cameras, print club auto-photography machines (puri-kura), souvenir photos (auto-photographic kinen-shashin), commemorative photos (at every get together), deceased photos that are taken to court rooms and hung up above the Buddhist altar (遺絵), as well as a long tradition of images of women for similar purposes (c.f. Timon Screech). There is even the "two dimensional girlfriend," and Japanese popstars, or "idols" are as much images as they are musicians. They are also the only country in the developed world where it is illegal to take photos of others even in a public place.

livinginnagoya "Why are there so many perverts here?"

You don't have to try very hard on Youtube to know that this problem is not only in Japan. There are many videos like this in Russian, Spanish-speaking, European, American and many other countries.

How about they just make it illegal to use cell phones on escalators and stairways? At least half a dozen times I've caught some jiji with his phone wedged up a young girl's crack on stairways and escalators at train stations. The first time I apprehended the pervert, but I ended in more trouble than him and was detained for nearly three hours. Now, it's usually just a firm tap on the shoulder and a look if disgust although, one time I asked him if he took a picture and if he would show it to me. His reaction was priceless! His eyes widened up and he bolted from the station. Sadly, this is up skirt photography is much more common than people would like to admit.

Easy solution: girls should wear pants! It looks better, no more pics possible and girls dont have to worry anymore I further dont get whats the problem at all. Nobody is hurt, then if the girl walks around half naked its her decision.

This is the truth. Everyone gets to choose their own clothes when they go outside. If a person chooses to dress in a manner that will reveal their underwear I assume that they simply don't mind showing their underwear. That goes for people wearing "low-rise" pants or shirts unbuttoned to the navel as well.

Stands to reason some weirdo is going to want to look at the person showing their underwear. Is the problem that its OK for the weirdo to look at the underwear, but not OK to take a picture of the underwear?

There's no solution to this. This is an aspect of having "public property" where everything thinks they have a "right" to do whatever they want.

People have a "right" to use their cell phones legally, which means using and pointing them (legally).

Girls have a "right" to wear skirts.

When it comes to government, and public property, you can't please all the people, all the time.

OTOH, if ALL property were PRIVATE, then it would be up the the property owner to make the rules, however he or she sees fit, and deal with the financial consequences.

(e.g. no cell phone photos, no skirts, whatever).

Easy solution: girls should wear pants! It looks better, no more pics possible and girls dont have to worry anymore

I further dont get whats the problem at all. Nobody is hurt, then if the girl walks around half naked its her decision.

Perhaps smart phones could contain some sort of underwear image recognition system and sound an alarm? I guess that this would prevent auto-upskirt photography. Is there such a genre?

Are there a lot of perverts in Japan. There is I think an even greater interest in two dimensional representations of women perhaps due to the influence of animism.

Why are there so many perverts here?

If the news is anything to go by, off-duty policemen are some of the worst culprits! They'd all be suspended if this law is implemented.

Perhaps that's a good thing?

easier to just ban skirts.

Sadder, too.

easier to just ban skirts.

Worst thing is they don't bother to ask themselves WHY there's such a legion of perverts in Japan.

Go to the beach and you can see all the skimpy dress gals, they must be weird taking up skirt photos.

Are personal radios (walkie-talkies) still around in Japan?

Moronic proposal.