Wer nicht erkannt werden will, sollte Masken tragen.

Denn nie werden alle Aufnahmen anonymisiert sein!

Great post.  I understand your point of view, but I have a thought.  Maybe I misunderstood the point of the demonstration, but if it is titled "Freedom, not Fear"  why the fear of recognition?  It's true that a lot of employers are checking on their current and future employees (even in America you might be asked for your facebook credentials as often as a reference these days) But Benjamin Franklin once said that those who would choose between "freedom and security don't deserve to have either" I would rather not work for an employer that would demand that I behave, think, act, believe exactly the same as they do.  I would never give up my freedom to do as I want for the security of a job. Just my opinion.

David, the demonstrations motto is directed at the state - instead of spreading FUD they should protect civil rights and the freedom of their citizens.

The example about a possible motive why you might want to be anonymous on a demonstration was just that - an example. I'm sure most of the attendees this Saturday have no such fears and aren't affected by being visible on other peoples photos. But I think it is good manners at least to respect the privacy of others on a political demonstration.

Mike, wearing a mask might be interpreted as a offense against the ban on wearing face coverings (Vermummungsverbot) and could get you in even more trouble.

I don't think google is taking your discourse seriously - http://wiki.jalakai.co.uk/past … dyblog.jpg

If someone is in a public place, they should accept the fact that people might recognize them.  Whether it be in real time, or later via photographic records doesn't matter. I'm not sure how anyone can engage in a public demonstration and feel they're protected from being identified.  If it was held on someone's private property, that's another story, but you can't expect, nor require public photography to contain such censorship. I guess I will never understand why people freak out about cameras in PUBLIC places.  In the USA there are adequate laws against surveillance in areas where people can expect a reasonable amount of privacy (i.e. fitting rooms, bathrooms).  Also, if an employer asked me for my facebook credentials, I'd be shocked.  They don't have any right, nor legal ground to request such a thing.  If you're one of the many who just collect friends to increase that little number on the side of your page, and accidentally add your boss into your circle of "friends" then nobody should feel sorry for you. :)

I'm really amazed how hard it seems to understand that this is *not* about the others. It is about *you*. It is about to understand that privacy is about to respect the privacy of others. Yes, it might be futile. But if *you* are at a demonstration and *you* take pictures it is *your* responsibility to respect the privacy of others.

If we all who attend a demonstration about privacy are serious about what we demand from the state and companies then we should have the good taste and manners to respect the privacy of our fellow demonstrators.

For me it is really an easy choice:

 * As a photographer of a political demonstration, I do not know if a picture of someone might get them into trouble.
 * As long as I don't know *if* it could get them into trouble, it is safer to assume that it *could* get them into trouble
 * Since I don't want to get anyone into trouble, I pixelize their face

Is that so hard to understand?

Yes, there might be some other photo that gets them into trouble, but at least *I* did my part to avoid that. And I think *you* should do the same.

Heh, it's always the Germans that have the strongest views about privacy. :)

aaron: this is for a reason. look at our history and try to understand.

* As a photographer of a political demonstration, I do not know if a picture of someone might get them into trouble.

Trouble?  That sounds like their problem, not yours.  Why would they get in trouble unless they're doing something they shouldn't?

* As long as I don't know *if* it could get them into trouble, it is safer to assume that it *could* get them into trouble

Again, not your responsibility, but you get points for being a considerate human being.

* Since I don't want to get anyone into trouble, I pixelize their face

That's your preference, (and very noble, and moral of you) just like it's your preference to believe in God, or not to believe.  It's also not your responsibility to tell others what they should believe, nor do I think it should be.

I think, in the end, it's each individual's responsibility to keep their identities private, not the millions of people who share their environment.

I'm probably missing some fundamental issue with privacy laws in Berlin or something, but it doesn't seem like an issue. I still don't understand what "trouble" they could get into.  I'm intrigued by the idea that they can't walk around with face coverings.

Maybe I should start a blog on how people in my neighborhood should stop walking in the street when there are sidewalks for that purpose. I mean, *I* walk on the sidewalk, so *they* should do the same. Right?

By definition, if they're in "public," there is no "privacy" to protect.  period.  they're antonyms.  Opposites.  You can't protect something that isn't there in the first place.  It's not as if they were photographed naked, or in mid-stumble over a curb where they could be embarrassed in which you'd be protecting their "feelings," not their privacy.

I'm all for treating others as I'd want to be treated...and I wouldn't expect someone to censor my face at a public protest.  I'd want them to know I was there.  That (to me) would be the point of BEING there. I could just as easily stay home and click a button on a petition site or something...

Anyway, it warms my heart to know there are people who actually THINK about censoring faces like that.  I doubt it happens very often, and this is the first time I've read about it being an issue.  I guess I just take issue with it being "private."  I think as soon as they stepped out into the street, they're fair game.  But it's kind of cool to know people would take the extra step to do that, because it shows "consideration" which is a rare trait these days.  I don't think it's worthwhile, or warranted, but in this case it truly is the thought that matters.

Nope,
it's like to drill ants.
it's like control web content.

If you like privacy attending a demonstration
- switch of you mobile
- masquerade yourself
- paint your face black and white
- where a cap, a hat or a wig
- talk to nobody
- change your way to move ;)

Nobody will know you. Everything is fine.

Okay, seems like I'm really the only one who thinks this is the right thing to do on a political demonstration. It also seems I'm the only one who thinks a political demonstration is different then walking the street.

Personally I find your approach to the privacy of others pretty disrespectful. But that's obviously just my opinion.

BTW. I'm not even arguing for *my* privacy here. I have no problem with being associated with this demonstration (obviously - because I blog about it). And I'm also pretty free about what I publish about myself in various online services. But that's *my* decision - which is a big difference for me.

Anyway it seems I either can't get my point across or my point is just plain stupid and an outdated relict of a past that is long gone.

Okay, just one more comment because this is really bugging me.

Imagine my neighbors from across the yard have sex. And in the heat of the moment they forgot to close their window blinds. If I follow your logic I can film them and upload the whole thing to youporn. After all, they could have protected their privacy, but didn't!

My argument is that, even so they did not protect their privacy, I should respect it. Sure my other neighbors might think different, but for me it is the right thing to do. And I think society would be better off if my neighbors would think the same.

Link to the upload please :)

@Andi Your comment reminds me a litte bit of the movie Crocodile Dundee I, when Croc made a picture of an aborigenee ;)

I think I understand you quite well. Making a movie of people in a private space and publishing is obviously forbidden and could be a break of the 6th commandment (see 2. Mose, 20). But the same rules for a demonstration? This is obviously public space.

Simbel from sechtem-wiki.de ;)

I do not care for any commandments of spiritual higher beings. To me this is a simple matter of decency and respect.

I wonder that this discussion is about Andi's decision to pixelize faces and not about the demonstration itself or - even more important - the reasons this demonstration took place. My English is not good enough to explain it but I am sure other already have.