Photographers Awareness on Laws

[Tuck Loong]

Having seen some controversial works from young and fresh photographers recently, I realised that there is a need for more awareness of the laws that we have to abide, especially with regards to undesirable content in this particular sub forum. More education must be emphasized to our very young photographers so they would not be breaking the law. Hope moderators can emphasize this beside the copyright issue

Undesirable Publications Act Cap. 338 (can be found: http://www.mda.gov.sg/wms.www/devnpolicies.aspx?sid=153)

Take note of these pointers:

Meaning of obscene
3. For the purposes of this Act, a publication is obscene if its effect or (where the publication comprises 2 or more distinct parts or items) the effect of any one of its parts or items is, if taken as a whole, such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it.

Meaning of objectionable
4. —(1) For the purposes of this Act, a publication is objectionable if, in the opinion of any controller, it or (where the publication comprises 2 or more distinct parts or items) any one of its parts or items describes, depicts, expresses or otherwise deals with —

(a) matters such as sex, horror, crime, cruelty, violence or the consumption of drugs or other intoxicating substances in such a manner that the availability of the publication is likely to be injurious to the public good; or

(b) matters of race or religion in such a manner that the availability of the publication is likely to cause feelings of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility between different racial or religious groups.
[2B
[9/98]

(2) In determining for the purposes of this Act whether or not any publication is objectionable, the following matters shall be considered:

(a) the extent and degree to which, and the manner in which, the publication —

(i) describes, depicts or otherwise deals with acts of torture, the infliction of serious physical harm, sexual conduct or violence or coercion in association with sexual conduct;

(ii) exploits the nudity of persons or children or both;

(iii) promotes or encourages criminal acts or acts of terrorism;

(iv) represents, directly or indirectly, that members of any particular community or group are inherently inferior to other members of the public or of any other community or group;

(b) the impact of the medium in which the publication is presented;

(c) the character of the publication, including any merit, value or importance that the publication has in relation to literary, artistic, social, cultural, educational, scientific or other matters;

(d) the standards of morality, decency and propriety that are generally accepted by reasonable members of the community; and

(e) the persons, classes of persons or age groups of the persons to whom the publication is intended or is likely to be made available.

Offences
6. —(1) Any person who imports, publishes, sells, offers for sale, supplies, offers to supply, exhibits, distributes or reproduces any prohibited publication or any extract therefrom shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction for a first offence to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years or to both, and for a subsequent offence to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 4 years.

(2) Any person who without reasonable excuse has in his possession any prohibited publication or any extract therefrom shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction for a first offence to a fine not exceeding $2,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both, and for a subsequent offence to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years.

Internet Industry Guidelines (can be found at http://www.mda.gov.sg/wms.www/devnpolicies.aspx?sid=161)

I hope this will help fellow photographer understand more about this laws

 

[Loupisk]

Thank you!

This is a very interesting message. I always wondered what was allowed and what was not.

This is edifying and lets me understand better the behavior of most photographers here!

 

[pingo]

IMHO, there are no rules in art and it should stay that way.

Though these laws were probably created for public 'good', it is *unfortunate* that they banned ALL WORKS and publications from my favourite photographer David Lachapelle here.

Sometimes I think these fellas over-do stuff. It's art for ***'s sake, not porn.

 

[Loupisk]

I shall suggest to the moderator or the creator of this website (who must be a great guy/women) to make this text the welcoming message of the portal before accessing the site.

It is very informative and since nobody is suppose to ignore the law, "more education" will be available to all.

This will certainly contribute to the image of this vibrant, world class, proud and prosperous community.:thumbsup:

 

[jdredd]

hmm.

there is a questoin regarding the extra territorial application of laws. whilst some legislation does have extra territorial effect in singapore, e.g. the ones against the consumption of drugs. but each act has to be decided on a case by case basis.

so one of the main factors that will have to be considered is where this site and messageboard is being hosted. this issue has not yet been resolved in the courts here.

 

[vince123123]

TL: do you have any specific threads/posts which you say are of concern viz the Undesirable Publications Act?

 

[Loupisk]

Reading how clubsnap describres itself, it does not seem that it links itself to any particular country or territory.

It says : "the photography community". Not the photography community of Iceland or Monaco.

Therefore, if the website is hosted outside of this bright little red dot, then I guess, who ever lives outside of SG and posts here, really does not have to mind this thread.:think:

hmm.

there is a questoin regarding the extra territorial application of laws. whilst some legislation does have extra territorial effect in singapore, e.g. the ones against the consumption of drugs. but each act has to be decided on a case by case basis.

so one of the main factors that will have to be considered is where this site and messageboard is being hosted. this issue has not yet been resolved in the courts here.

 

[Loupisk]

I also wonder.

Maybe some explicit nude that had links on other websites?

TL: do you have any specific threads/posts which you say are of concern viz the Undesirable Publications Act?

 

[mattlock]

Does this mean I have to stop shooting pictures of wet sloppy vaginas?damn.

oh to hell with the laws.if artists were so concerned with laws then many of the great movies paintings photographs in the history of mankind would never have been made
oh yeah and all the great porn....

 

[panzerpunk]

If its published and sold in the streets, you can post it online without fearing anything or anyone. Laws are laws. You just need to know where to draw the line.

I think this topic was intended for the vou******* pics in the portraits section. The intention for this topic is good, but it is an overkill and can be drawn upon like an attack.

 

[redstone]

Also the issue about building photography, security and privacy.

All these regarding the law should be made Sticky.

 

[Loupisk]

Deep throat !

Best movie ever !:bsmilie:

Specially for Nixon !:bheart: :bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

Does this mean I have to stop shooting pictures of wet sloppy vaginas?damn.

oh to hell with the laws.if artists were so concerned with laws then many of the great movies paintings photographs in the history of mankind would never have been made
oh yeah and all the great porn....

 

[microcosm]

While the Singapore law is more relaxed these days over this, I think ultimately its up to the owners of this forums to decide where they want to draw the line. Afterall, CS is not a registered society right? if that is the case, then anything goes in this place and thus its up to the owner of this forums to make the decision where the line is drawn.

Honestly, a tit here and a butt there does not offend anyone... being overly protective of the children here only drives them to find out and explore sex in a worse way. We have been young before and even before the internet was around, still porn floated around in schools even right? So? Does it really make a difference? Not to mention, with the internet, accessibility is not ever a problem and kids knowws how to bypass a parent filter in minutes. They are way more computer savvy than their folks these days.

So I don't think we should overract at all.

The problem is more of invasion of privacy and unauthorised use of images that is the cause of concern in this boards.

Let's hear what the owners of the forums has to say about this.

Respect.

 

[vince123123]

Yeap, I think that before we even ask the forum owners to state a stand, the TS should first give us a look at what threads/posts/photos he finds posted on this site that he feels contravenes the laws.

I also wonder.

Maybe some explicit nude that had links on other websites?

 

[kirk]

TL: do you have any specific threads/posts which you say are of concern viz the Undesirable Publications Act?

The thread in question has been removed by the moderator a short while after it was posted.

For all who are concerned about how laws in different countries may be enforced, especially with concern to photographers and copyright, please visit this link http://www.wipo.int/portal/index.html.en

 

[vince123123]

I'll wait for TL to confirm this, but in such a case, there is no reference to what TL says could possibly contravene the Act in question.

And since you said that the threads that TL is referring to, have been removed, this already shows the stand of the forum owners and no further statement is required.

The thread in question has been removed by the moderator a short while after it was posted.

For all who are concerned about how laws in different countries may be enforced, especially with concern to photographers and copyright, please visit this link http://www.wipo.int/portal/index.html.en

 

[richardg]

very useful info
how about some info on "privacy" issues
eg. no taking of photos in toilets,
shopping centres also dun permit phototaking
etc?

 

[theRBK]

IMHO, there are no rules in art and it should stay that way.

Though these laws were probably created for public 'good', it is *unfortunate* that they banned ALL WORKS and publications from my favourite photographer David Lachapelle here.

Sometimes I think these fellas over-do stuff. It's art for ***'s sake, not porn.

actually, books on LaChapelle with images of his works are available in many bookshops in Singapore...

 

[kirk]

I'll wait for TL to confirm this, but in such a case, there is no reference to what TL says could possibly contravene the Act in question.

And since you said that the threads that TL is referring to, have been removed, this already shows the stand of the forum owners and no further statement is required.

Aiyo...:bsmilie:
Yes, forum owners have shown their stand by removing the offending post.
But you miss the point of why he started this thread. He is just raising a subject that all of us should take note of, so that we will bear in mind certain social rules and laws that we must adhere to, despite having artistic freedom to express our ideas on images.

Cheers.

 

[vince123123]

Yea the point abt the mod's stand was more directed at others asking for the mod's stand and not so much directed at you.

The only thing I'm still boggled over is what sort of pictures he said were posted here he thinks contravenes the Act.

Aiyo...:bsmilie:
Yes, forum owners have shown their stand by removing the offending post.
But you miss the point of why he started this thread. He is just raising a subject that all of us should take note of, so that we will bear in mind certain social rules and laws that we must adhere to, despite having artistic freedom to express our ideas on images.

Cheers.