news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

every day in this world, there are people whose spouses use surveillance to catch them cheating on them.

but behind this behavior, legality becomes an issue.

dr. clacton, maine, after catching his wife on her phone performing a show with another man at their home.

the next day, he took his wife to court with the video. the crime is infringement of legitimate rights.

but soon after the trial began, the court ruled that clacton's behavior was a clear violation of his wife's privacy rights.

after the incident, clacton faced three months in prison, a $1,000 fine, and a lifetime ban from the woman who betrayed him.

after the verdict came into effect, there was an uproar among the people.

people think that this is the judge's right to protect the affair and make all the abandoned husbands and orphans who are suffering pay the price for their legitimate behavior of catching and capturing an adulterer.

but judge grace in the court determined that "although the wife had already committed an act that exceeded the rules of their marriage, clark's failure to tell his wife while pretending to be under surveillance was unforgivable and showed contempt for citizens' privacy rights."

in the western context, the loss of privacy means that individuals will be fully controlled by power.

personal information will no longer be in the hands of individuals, but will be used to maintain the power structure of others.

in accordance with various directives of countries such as article 250 of the new york state penal code, article 632 of the chilean protection of privacy act, the united states privacy act, the british national act, the german federal data act and the indian personal data protection act.

it can be said that it is illegal to install private cameras to catch cheating in almost any part of the world.

if you pick up the evidence, you will be sent to jail; if you don't get the evidence, you will lose your face.

this is a difficult, unsolvable equation for anyone who has known a partner to be cheating.

a green guru on reddit once revealed in the forum that because he couldn't stand his wife's cheating for three years, he decisively installed cameras in his home to save his face.

later, his wife took him to court and took away his property, children, freedom and future.

although the marriage was relieved, life also ushered in a trough. now he regrets it.

john rawls proposed the theory of the "veil of ignorance" in a theory of justice.

he emphasized that the interests of all individuals should be considered when formulating social rules to ensure justice.

"but even under the best circumstances, it would take a week for a person to collect evidence that his partner has cheated on him through legal channels. if the other party is a master of counter-investigation, there will be no upper limit to this period."

joseph ritz, a professor at the department of law at columbia university, said that the side effects of excessive citizen privacy protection in various countries today are that "bad guys" find safety in it, but "good guys" also become fearful.

depending on how seriously each country takes privacy rights, the price you have to bear after such a defensive action will also vary.

for india, the punishment for similar cases is only a fine; for germany, this will put you in jail for up to three years and a penalty of 10,000 euros.

morality is the highest standard of law, and law is also the minimum morality.

for anyone who has been "exploited" by reality in terms of face and dignity, in a larger context, your way out can only be the arrangement within the existing rules.

but from another perspective, no snowflake is innocent under the avalanche.

when a regulation is recognized around the world, it must also reflect some global crux that urgently needs to be restrained by this regulation.

according to data previously released by the united nations crime office, as audio and video equipment becomes lighter and smaller, the number of sexually explicit videos secretly filmed at home has soared from more than 30,000 in 2002 to more than 200 million today.

in a context of betrayal, you can use any behavior to defend your right to regain face.

but on a bottom line level. the lack of privacy means that each of us will be exposed to the surveillance of power and will no longer have the freedom to protect ourselves.

"people value privacy because they are defending their freedom and the possibility for individuals to maintain their independence and anonymity in society. privacy involves not only the confidentiality of information, but also the rights to personal space, free choice and self-expression."

in today's highly civilized world, the marginal benefits of privacy and law are diminishing.

"surveillance is pervasive," professor stuart said.

"as long as individuals realize that they may be monitored at any time, they will internalize social disciplines and actively adjust their behavior to conform to social norms."

but in the foreseeable future, these disputes will still continue, ethics will be trampled on, and hands that plunder privacy will move to more secret corners.

and i just feel that if there is no basic trust, why bother taking this path in the first place.