Questions about privacy right and laws in USA - 未名空间MITBBS历史存档

国际科技财经博客移民网络热点娱乐民生时事公众号

Redian新闻

>未名空间

>Law - 律师事务所

Questions about privacy right and laws in USA

Questions about privacy right and laws in USA# Law - 律师事务所

o*p2005-07-20 07:07

1 楼

Hi,
I have some questions about the privacy right and related laws in the United S
tates: how exactly is "personal privacy right" defined by the law and how can
one exercise his/her right in correct, lawful way?
for example, some journalists may follow some people who does NOT realize that
he/she is followed. Even these journalists may make videos out of this, later
on, these videos are broadcasted on TV, for sure without the approval of that
guy. Do these things violate that guy's privacy right

c*i2005-07-20 07:07

2 楼

I will reply in the order of your paragraphs.
(1) Check law books. But the examples you gave involved no privacy.
(2) A journalist is just an ordinary human being in US--usually no more and no
less rights than the person next to him. This is particularly true nowadays b
ecause everybody can set up a blog and publish his observations or opinions.
Then, there is no privacy whatsoever for your appearance:everybody can see it.
(3) You misunderstand the nature of the computer in your workplace. It si

【在 o****p 的大作中提到】

: Hi,
: I have some questions about the privacy right and related laws in the United S
: tates: how exactly is "personal privacy right" defined by the law and how can
: one exercise his/her right in correct, lawful way?
: for example, some journalists may follow some people who does NOT realize that
: he/she is followed. Even these journalists may make videos out of this, later
: on, these videos are broadcasted on TV, for sure without the approval of that
: guy. Do these things violate that guy's privacy right

o*p2005-07-20 07:07

3 楼

Thanks a lot for replying my questions. I have a few more thoughts:
(1) now I see all your explanations. Except one thing, I guess the example wit
h journalist publicizing other people's appearance is not an issue of privacy,
instead, it should be an issue of copy right. Bacause TV station broadcasts p
eople's appearance for commercial purpose, while it has no permission of that
person. Am I right?
(2) People are not *SUPPOSED* to do private stuffs on working computers, becau
se computers are ow

【在 c**i 的大作中提到】

: I will reply in the order of your paragraphs.
: (1) Check law books. But the examples you gave involved no privacy.
: (2) A journalist is just an ordinary human being in US--usually no more and no
: less rights than the person next to him. This is particularly true nowadays b
: ecause everybody can set up a blog and publish his observations or opinions.
: Then, there is no privacy whatsoever for your appearance:everybody can see it.
: (3) You misunderstand the nature of the computer in your workplace. It si

c*i2005-07-20 07:07

4 楼

With regard to your response.
(1) I don't know what you are saying. Whose copy right? A person has copy righ
t for his appearance?
(2) I guess you have attitude problem. Nobody forces you to work in US. And I
have no time to for you, either. Yes, Americans do things at work they are not
supposed to do. See
http://www.salary.com/careers/layoutscripts/crel_display.asp?tab=cre&cat=nocat
&ser=Ser374&part=Par555
But if one is caught, he faces the consequences.

【在 o****p 的大作中提到】

: Thanks a lot for replying my questions. I have a few more thoughts:
: (1) now I see all your explanations. Except one thing, I guess the example wit
: h journalist publicizing other people's appearance is not an issue of privacy,
: instead, it should be an issue of copy right. Bacause TV station broadcasts p
: eople's appearance for commercial purpose, while it has no permission of that
: person. Am I right?
: (2) People are not *SUPPOSED* to do private stuffs on working computers, becau
: se computers are ow

o*p2005-07-20 07:07

5 楼

Please see my response below.
By the way, please, some professional guys in law can help us?

> (1) I don't know what you are saying. Whose copy right? A person has copy ri
gh
>t for his appearance?
I'm not a professional guy, so I won't claim I know all things clearly.
About this, I happened to hear from someone who seems know this well. This
is what I was told: by default,the person on a photo/picture/video owns the
copyright, unless he and the other party signed copyright agreement to
release

【在 c**i 的大作中提到】

: With regard to your response.
: (1) I don't know what you are saying. Whose copy right? A person has copy righ
: t for his appearance?
: (2) I guess you have attitude problem. Nobody forces you to work in US. And I
: have no time to for you, either. Yes, Americans do things at work they are not
: supposed to do. See
: http://www.salary.com/careers/layoutscripts/crel_display.asp?tab=cre&cat=nocat
: &ser=Ser374&part=Par555
: But if one is caught, he faces the consequences.

o*p2005-07-20 07:07

6 楼

See my response below. LOL!

> Yes, Americans do things at work they are not
> supposed to do. See
>http://www.salary.com/careers/layoutscripts/crel_display.asp?tab=cre&cat=noca
t
>&ser=Ser374&part=Par555
>But if one is caught, he faces the consequences.
firstly, let me quote points from your link (all of them are from the article
you gave us!)
quote 1
"
As a matter of practice, companies assume a certain amount of wasted time when
determining employee pay.
"
quote 2
"
Are workers really expecte

【在 c**i 的大作中提到】

s*i2005-07-20 07:07

7 楼

这么耐心回答问题，不错不错！

o*p2005-07-20 07:07

8 楼

just some final off-topic words about the case 2 situation - totally off-topic
personal opinions.
Though it does not violate privacy or whatever law, the organization/company/
universities that do such monitoring things are two kinds:
1. abnormal
2. crappy/psycho(or: sick)
some classified corporates (like Los Alama) belongs to abnormal - it is
understandable.
Those companies/organizations/universities and their "mercenary" who do these
things, in my personal common sense, can be said to be crapp

【在 o****p 的大作中提到】

: See my response below. LOL!
:
: > Yes, Americans do things at work they are not
: > supposed to do. See
: >http://www.salary.com/careers/layoutscripts/crel_display.asp?tab=cre&cat=noca
: t
: >&ser=Ser374&part=Par555
: >But if one is caught, he faces the consequences.
: firstly, let me quote points from your link (all of them are from the article
: you gave us!)

c*i2005-07-20 07:07

9 楼

Why you are so upset is simply beyond me. May I remind you that an employer
can legally listen in to all of your phone conversations and go through your
drawers in your absence, wihout a warrant? See
http://www.legalzoom.com/articles/article_content/article13177.html
Can an employee in China do things you suggest?

topic
/

【在 o****p 的大作中提到】

: just some final off-topic words about the case 2 situation - totally off-topic
: personal opinions.
: Though it does not violate privacy or whatever law, the organization/company/
: universities that do such monitoring things are two kinds:
: 1. abnormal
: 2. crappy/psycho(or: sick)
: some classified corporates (like Los Alama) belongs to abnormal - it is
: understandable.
: Those companies/organizations/universities and their "mercenary" who do these
: things, in my personal common sense, can be said to be crapp

o*p2005-07-20 07:07

10 楼

choi,
first let me clear me up - I was not in any way upset over you. if somehow I
had offended you, I do want to apologize for it. Actually I enjoyed the
discussion with you guys, also thanks for all you guys' input! Please don't
get any wrong impression about me - sometimes I did joke around, but no bad
intention at all :)
If you ask me if I have any attitude to the people in the cases I gave, my
answer is, yes, sure. I heard/saw many such cases, I felt hell sick of it!
That is why I wanted to

【在 c**i 的大作中提到】

: Why you are so upset is simply beyond me. May I remind you that an employer
: can legally listen in to all of your phone conversations and go through your
: drawers in your absence, wihout a warrant? See
: http://www.legalzoom.com/articles/article_content/article13177.html
: Can an employee in China do things you suggest?
:
: topic
: /

c*i2005-07-20 07:07

11 楼

You may, or may not (in this case, you are being kind), have misunderstood me.
In my previous posting, I was saying I failed to comprehend why the pertinent
laws on workplace upset you, rather than I upset you. The state laws are
enacted by state legislatur and interpreted by a state court. The employers
are FOLLOWING the laws. If an employer can't monitor use of his computers or
telephones and some crazy employee use them to commit crimes * * * The world
is not made up of only employees.
I had

【在 o****p 的大作中提到】

: choi,
: first let me clear me up - I was not in any way upset over you. if somehow I
: had offended you, I do want to apologize for it. Actually I enjoyed the
: discussion with you guys, also thanks for all you guys' input! Please don't
: get any wrong impression about me - sometimes I did joke around, but no bad
: intention at all :)
: If you ask me if I have any attitude to the people in the cases I gave, my
: answer is, yes, sure. I heard/saw many such cases, I felt hell sick of it!
: That is why I wanted to

c*i2005-07-20 07:07

12 楼

Without an explanation, your answer to example 3 is "maybe." Why is that? Can
you cite a statute or case law?

* * *
My answer to the 3 cases are: no, no, maybe.

o*p2005-07-20 07:07

13 楼

Please see my reply below.

pertinent
I'm not really that upset about the laws, am I? Law is the law, which cannot
be perfect. However, in the case like the second example I gave, it does
encourage some people's behavior beyond normal rationale - it's very
inappropriate, that is the word I should choose.
It is correct that the employers are following the laws. It does NOT
automatically imply that anything following laws are good - some bad and smart
guys could also use the laws to play tricks an

【在 c**i 的大作中提到】

: Without an explanation, your answer to example 3 is "maybe." Why is that? Can
: you cite a statute or case law?
:
: * * *
: My answer to the 3 cases are: no, no, maybe.

c*i2005-07-20 07:07

14 楼

I don't subscribe to Wall Street Journal. But I type this for you, instead of
using "cut and paste."
Laurie P. Cohen, et al, How Media Spit Under Pressure in the Leak Probe. WSJ.
Jul. 29, 2005, at A1 ("Time Inc. technically owned an electronic file that
contained [its reporter] Mr. Cooper's notes, [Time editor] Perstine] said. As
a result, the parent company [Time Warner] could potentially be held in
contempt of court and forced to pay large fines if its magazineand reporter
didn't cooperate [wi

【在 o****p 的大作中提到】

: Please see my reply below.
:
: pertinent
: I'm not really that upset about the laws, am I? Law is the law, which cannot
: be perfect. However, in the case like the second example I gave, it does
: encourage some people's behavior beyond normal rationale - it's very
: inappropriate, that is the word I should choose.
: It is correct that the employers are following the laws. It does NOT
: automatically imply that anything following laws are good - some bad and smart
: guys could also use the laws to play tricks an

o*p2005-07-20 07:07

15 楼

I don't know what an intelligent conversation is like in your mind, but I gave
up here. Honestly, it's getting really boring now. I want to stop the
wondering chain here, bye!!!

of
.
As
]

【在 c**i 的大作中提到】

: I don't subscribe to Wall Street Journal. But I type this for you, instead of
: using "cut and paste."
: Laurie P. Cohen, et al, How Media Spit Under Pressure in the Leak Probe. WSJ.
: Jul. 29, 2005, at A1 ("Time Inc. technically owned an electronic file that
: contained [its reporter] Mr. Cooper's notes, [Time editor] Perstine] said. As
: a result, the parent company [Time Warner] could potentially be held in
: contempt of court and forced to pay large fines if its magazineand reporter
: didn't cooperate [wi

c*i2005-07-20 07:07

16 楼

c*i2005-07-20 07:07

17 楼