• On GameFAQs: The top 10 forgotten RPGs
January 26, 2009 10:47 PM PST

Congressman wants to ban silent camera phones

by Kent German
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 34 comments

If you think the biggest problem with a camera phone is the poor quality of the photos, a member of Congress might make you think again. Earlier this month, Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.) introduced a bill in the House of Representatives that would ban camera phones from having a silent mode when taking a picture.

The Camera Phone Predator Alert Act (H.R. 414) would "require any mobile phone containing a digital camera to sound a tone whenever a photograph is taken." What's more, the bill would prohibit such handsets from being equipped with a means of disabling or silencing the tone. Enforcement would be through the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

The text of the bill is short, and King's office has not released any public statements. Yet, the reasoning behind the legislation is clear. The text states that "Congress finds that children and adolescents have been exploited by photographs taken in dressing rooms and public places with the use of a camera phone."

At the time of this writing the bill has been referred to the House Energy and Commerce. The Camera Phone Predator Alert Act has no co-sponsors.

Kent German is a senior editor for cell phone reviews at CNET. When he's not testing the newest handsets on the market, he's blogging about cell phone news for Crave. In his On Call column, he answers reader questions and gives his take on the rapidly changing mobile industry. E-mail Kent.
Recent posts from Crave
MP3 Insider Podcast 170: Holiday hullabaloo
BMW debuts the new 5-series online
Out-of-this-world gifts for space fiends
Indecent Exposure Podcast 69: Intervals explored
GoPro HD Hero Motorsports sacrifices simplicity for flexibility
Tweaks can't save low-buck LG's picture quality
Tamrac's new foldable tripod is like tent poles
Creative set to release latest Flip Video competitor
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 2 pages (34 Comments)
by iamcgw January 26, 2009 11:10 PM PST
Moronic !!!
Reply to this comment
by fleurya January 28, 2009 7:59 AM PST
Take thumb, place over speaker opening. Easiest law to break, ever. But please, continue to waste time and money on stupid laws when real problems need to be solved.
by opiapr January 26, 2009 11:17 PM PST
Another overstepping of congress. Focused more on stupidity than on really important issues. What's next? the sound isn't to loud so lets ban cameras on phone altogether wow theirs go innovation once again.
Reply to this comment
by solitare_pax January 27, 2009 2:55 AM PST
Agreed - Cell phones only make it easier. If someone really wants pictures, they will find a way around it.

Could Mr. King focus on fixing the economy now?
by jaggedpath January 26, 2009 11:26 PM PST
Read this BBC article from 2003:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/2984780.stm
Reply to this comment
by mutualin4mation January 27, 2009 2:08 AM PST
My gym wont allow phones in the locker room. Not that anyone follows that guideline to a tee.
by trowaman January 26, 2009 11:50 PM PST
BAD PETER!

King's been known over the last 8 years for being "tough on terror" cause he's from Long Island. Whatever. Here's the political run down on King's future.

A) Run for Senate against Gillibrand or another democrat should she be beaten (not happening, watch her 2006 and 2008 campaign material, she is made of charisma).
B) Hold on to his Long Island Congressional District (CD-3) and hope that he can hold on in 2012. This will be the first time in New York history that Democrats have complete control over the redistricting process (Governor, State House, and State Senate). Expect King's slightly Democratic district to become a VERY Democratic district. New York will be losing one congressman in 2012 but that will be coming from upstate where the population loss has been occurring.
Reply to this comment
by Jon January 27, 2009 12:06 AM PST
Although I can understand the angst surrounding "right to privacy" and protecting children from exploitation, this bill, at this reading, does not make sense. Camera phones are not the only devices used by such perverts to abuse others. There are a whole slew of devices that can be and are used. Simple small digital cameras, hidden webcams, etc, are plentiful. Legislation like this does not make the world safer . . . it just makes things difficult for those of us who are decent folk and do not have these nefarious visions of our fellow travelers. I think there must be a better way to attend to this situation. Morality cannot be effectively legislated.
Reply to this comment
by Ryan_R January 27, 2009 12:22 AM PST
Any pervert or security risk would simply need to acquire an older phone that has the silent functionality, while the rest of us will now be unable to secretly take embarrassing photo's of our family members. Thanks a lot :o)
Reply to this comment
by Alwarming January 27, 2009 12:38 AM PST
I think the proposal is working on the law of probability.. make taking obscene pictures harder.

What about videos ? will it also tgo click click as long as it is recording ? Will it not affect the quality of recorded audio ? Or are they against only still pictures ?
Reply to this comment
by jbc94523 January 27, 2009 12:55 AM PST
What a complete waste of time and taxpayer money.
Reply to this comment
by assman January 27, 2009 1:50 AM PST
Republicans eh.. less regulation for things that need it, such as in the financial market, but MORE regulation when it can annoy millions of consumers and force their ideological "moral high-ground" on the public. Great priorities.
Reply to this comment
by aMUSICsite January 27, 2009 2:05 AM PST
Will not work. People that want to take photos silently will still find a way and the normal user will loose a nice function.

Also if it's only law in the US then you just get a foriegn phone! Do they not think these things through!!!
Reply to this comment
by flying26u January 27, 2009 3:19 AM PST
KEEP YOUR GD NOSE OUT OF PRIVATE CITIZENS BUSINESS! YOU HAVE A RATING BELOW 5 PERCENT. THATS SHAMEFUL~ START WITH THE ECONOMY AND DO NOT DO ANY BATHROOM "TRICKS" AND YOU WON'T GET CAUGHT AND GO TO JAIL!!!
Reply to this comment
by snesich January 27, 2009 4:14 AM PST
This is idiotic. But remember, this isn't "Congress" advocating this stupid idea, it's one congressman: Peter King from Long Island. This is just the latest ding-dong idea from this incompetent blowhard. King is great at putting himself in front of the cameras as some self-styled, important "moralist" and "tough guy". He's actually the complete opposite.

This latest idea of his is almost too ridiculous to even address. Will this new "anti predator" camera make this loud, obnoxious "warning noise" when I'm taking photos at Grandma's birthday too? Dumb.

King was also one of the biggest cheerleaders for the Bush invasion and occupation of Iraq. King is one of those congressman who gladly handed over the lives of our kids and billions of our hard earned tax dollars for some bizarre fantasy about taking control of a country in the heart of Arabia that had never attacked us.

Peter King, blowhard, Bush-Lover, hypocrite: I think his days in office are running out and his actions will get more desperate and more strange. I think he needs to retire and give someone with a clearer head a fresh start. Bye, Peter.
Reply to this comment
by heyitswilliam January 27, 2009 4:58 AM PST
This guy needs to be UNEMPLOYED! What an idiot!
Reply to this comment
by tenc21 January 28, 2009 8:32 AM PST
This guy IS unemployed. No one in government (any level) does any "work". They get unemployment compensation or a salary for doing nothing, and sometimes for doing something as annoying and useless as this proposed bill. Shakespeare shoulda said, "Kill all government workers"
by userNoname January 27, 2009 5:02 AM PST
Another bill on the list of funny ones to say at least. So, gun silencer is OK while mobile silencer will be banned? Jeeesus....
Reply to this comment
by fleurya January 27, 2009 9:07 AM PST
BEST COMMENT EVER!!!!
by xcal78 January 27, 2009 5:02 AM PST
As long as people use their camera phones when and where they are allowed ther's no issues. I personally think to many companies are making cerma phones and there is a huge demand for phones with no camera's. My old job was a secury facility. Hundreads of people weren't allowed to bring a camera phone into the facility. Being caught with one was Mr. Pink Slip. That pretty much goes for all government buildings or companies doing classified work for the government. I can understand no camera phones in gym's too.

The flip side to that is generally people will break rules if they think they can get away with it. We need to crack down so add a sound to camera's or make the penelties if caught very high. If caught with a camera phone in a gym your membership is revoked no questions asked the 1st offense.
Reply to this comment
by Jsqured91 January 27, 2009 5:02 AM PST
fail
i think king got caught doing something with silent camera phone
Reply to this comment
by dtabraha January 27, 2009 6:53 AM PST
Honestly it is really a great idea.

There are tons of victims of upskirt, downblouse, locker room and pedophile pictures, not to mention the corporate espionage implications.

There are NO victims if it passes. How does making a click sound hurt anyone?

Obviously a professional could disable the sound, but this is about taking the temptation away from 90% of the people who might voilate someone else's privacy, and leaving the remaining 10% to get busted by the cops later on.
Reply to this comment
by fleurya January 27, 2009 9:06 AM PST
Don't use percentages when they're based on nothing! It's not just about a little clicking noise on a phone. It's about taking a bad step on a slippery slope. It's about trying to fix a problem with the wrong solution. (like fixing a broken leg with a band-aid) There are other ways to deter these perverts without making everyone's life worse.

For one, people need to be more aware of others around them for more reasons than just a possible photo taken up their skirt. They need to take some darn responsibility for themselves! Also, as others have said, there are multiple ways to get around this, and it's easy enough that more than 10% of people can do it. If someone is willing to take the risk, they are pretty motivated and will find a way. Any idiot with an internet connection can jailbreak and iPhone, for example.
by snesich January 27, 2009 12:25 PM PST
"...great idea"? LOL!!!

This is the idea of an idiot, or a con man. Or both. "NO victims"? What about all of the manufacturers who now have to redesign all future phones so that they'll comply with this new legal requirement?

Also, where are you getting these silly numbers from "90% of the people" according to what source?

Did bimbo Peter King write this post himself, or did he tell an intern to do it?
by JadedGamer January 29, 2009 12:48 PM PST
Oh NOES the perverts have to switch to movie mode! Or a million other non-phone devices with cameras! What a challenge!

Then again, following after Korea and Japan (where upskirt photos is a social problem) is perhaps as far as he can muster interest in anything but the next golf game...
by Kilgore76 January 27, 2009 7:42 AM PST
So... Have you tried to leave a message on his website?? I did and guess what it doesn't work after you enter your name and zip it comes up with an error. So here we have a guy who is going to legislate technology but can't even get a basic web site to work properly.
Reply to this comment
by TacticalMedic January 27, 2009 7:45 AM PST
Could the photographer currently be arrested under harassment? I have no idea.
Perhaps change a current law, and don't stipulate to phone manufacturers the need to make the damn phone beep, chime, etc.
Concentrate on other issues that need far more attention.
Reply to this comment
by aka_tripleB January 27, 2009 7:54 AM PST
I think the bill is too narrow. I understand why he proposed the bill, but it should span all cameras not just camera phones. If you're going to write a law, you should at least be efficient about how you spend the time and money so you don't have to go back an amend the bill to include standard and digital cameras.
Reply to this comment
by fleurya January 27, 2009 9:11 AM PST
way too many cameras out there that already take photos without a noise. It would take years to filter them out. Plus, as someone already pointed out, you could simply get a camera from another country without the noise. The entire world isn't going to roll over for this US law and it's way too easy for these motivated perverts to get something like that online from overseas.
Showing 1 of 2 pages (34 Comments)

About Crave

The name says it all. Crave is our blog about gorgeous gadgets and other crushworthy stuff. If you would like to contact Crave with a tip or comment, please write to: crave@cnet.com

Add this feed to your online news reader

Crave topics

Let the battle for holiday gadget shoppers begin

Retailers try different strategies for competing with behemoths like Amazon and Wal-Mart in the cutthroat competition to lure those giving electronics as gifts.

Firefox hopes to one-up IE with fast graphics

Windows 7 features called Direct2D and DirectWrite will speed up Internet Explorer 9 performance. But Firefox hopes it might retool for the same benefit first.