Yes well - you'd know, wouldn't you Boazy?

Actually, I agree with the general notion that if one goes nude or topless in a public space, then one should be prepared to be seen and for one's image to be recorded legitimately. If the idea of one's nude or semi-nude image being promulgated on the Internet or anywhere is worrisome, then perhaps one should not expose oneself in public spaces.

Of course, I imagine that for most people it's simply a non-issue.

GrahamY,

2 cents worth:
"...when a woman is sunbathing topless she is merely consenting to other people observing her with the naked eye, in that place...
"Her consent doesn't stretch to other people photographing her and then exposing the photographs all over the internet."

This argument is probably valid for nude, special or private beaches maybe. But going to public beaches and asking the society and police to stop every looker and tourist with a camera is at best irresponsible.

Food for thoughts,

Some thoughts one this.
- Most of us make choices regarding aspects of our behaviour according to who is around. A topless bather might be more comfortable amongst close friends and complete strangers than in front of office collegues. Use of photographs takes that ability from us.
- I think the subject of the picture should carry some weight in this issue. Should I be banned from taking a picture of my child playing on the beach because someones breasts might be visible in the background? I think not. On the other hand should I be allowed to walk up and take a close up of those same breasts? I think most of us would see that differently. Then we get into issues of camera resolution, power of zoom lenses and other stuff that makes that boundary had to define.
- Should we let the abusers control what the rest of us do and don't do. I think not.

Summary, I think that some people are to keen to limit other peoples freedoms to enhance their own. Why should a photographer have their freedoms stomped on to improve the topless sunbathers sense of comfort?

About as valid as suggesting that topless sunbathers be banned because they might limit the freedom of puritan photographers to take pictures on the beach (they might be uncomfortable with a nipple in their picture).

R0bert

I take a position midway between complete freedom in respect of photography and complete prohibition.

To my mind, anyone who's in a public place is fair game for being photographed. The issue of nudity, or partial nudity, should be irrelevant.

On the other hand, it seems to me that if anyone's image is published on the Internet, then that person should have the right to insist on its removal except where other considerations apply. Other considerations would be things such as

a) The person's presence in the picture is incidental to its main purpose.

b) The presence of the image on the internet is in the public interest. Essentially this would be similar to one of the defences that exists in defamation cases.

There could be a take-down rule that is similar to that for alleged copyright infringement.

Of course, one difficulty with this is that once the photograph has been taken, it can be placed on a web site anywhere in the world. To give effect to the take-down rules would require international agreements such as exist, to some extent, for copyright.

On the question of whether it is unlawful for a woman to be topless on a public beach, there are no state laws in Australia that expressly prohibit it. The only laws that can be applied are those relating to offensive behaviour, or where a council has passed a bylaw, or erected signs (NSW) to prohibit people being topless.

In QLD, it's doubtful whether a woman could be prosecuted for being topless anywhere that a man can go topless, because the Anti Discrimination Act would appear to prevent the police from discriminating on grounds of sex when applying the law, and prevent councils from passing bylaws that discriminate.

“Do it in public... take what comes. If you flaunt your attributes in a public place”

David, that could be interpreted as Sheik Hilali type of remark (or remark attributed to him?), if you now what I mean.

Whether a woman is topless or not, on a public beach, it would be inappropriate for someone to come up and take a photo of her without asking.

That’s a basic matter of common decency and violation of personal space or the right to be in public without being harassed or unduly bothered.

We also need to think of just how photos can be used, in ways completely different to the context in which they were taken.

So yes, there should be some restrictions on photographing people in public. However, it cannot be to the extent that a single bikini-clad woman on the beach, 200 metres away, prevents someone from taking a scenic photo of that beach.

So to just what extent such restrictions should apply is a matter of debate.

.
Sylvia

“To my mind, anyone who's in a public place is fair game for being photographed.”

Yes, but not in an overt manner, where they are the soul subject of the photo, unless they give their permission.

I agree; a middle of the road interpretation is needed here.

“On the question of whether it is unlawful for a woman to be topless on a public beach, there are no state laws in Australia that expressly prohibit it. The only laws that can be applied are those relating to offensive behaviour…”

But it is illegal to go nude in public, which is automatically considered offensive behaviour, for males at least. Bare bums on public beaches appear to be acceptable too, in many situations. So is nudity specifically defined as uncovered nether regions?

“In QLD, it's doubtful whether a woman could be prosecuted for being topless anywhere that a man can go topless…”

I find that hard to believe. In the crowd at the cricket is one example where men can go shirtless but it would surely not be tolerated for women.

Ludvig,

There is no specific prohibition in QLD state law against nudity in public. There is a prohibition against wilful exposure of the genitals in a public place, but with a defence of reasonable excuse. It is only the reasonable excuse defence that allows you to undress in a public changing room, so in QLD the question of whether you can be nude on a beach is determined by whether you have a reasonable excuse. I would have thought that the fact that a beach is a defacto nude beach would be a reasonable excuse, though as yet, the only court to consider the issue, a magistrates court, has not supported my view.

In any case, the breasts are not genitals, so exposing them is not caught by that law.

In NSW, there is a prohibition against being in the nude on beaches (and some other places) except for some specified beaches, and beaches made clothing optional by councils. However, note that the law uses the expression "in the nude". A person who is topless is not described as being "in the nude" so that law does not prevent people from being topless.

As for a woman being topless at the cricket in QLD, to the best of my knowledge the question of whether the Anti Discrimination Act prevents the police from prosecuting women but not men has never been tested. No doubt the police would arrest a woman who did it and refused to put her top on, but that doesn't make it unlawful