[BrianR]

Perhaps I spoke too strongly too quickly.

It is against my capitalist nature to ban a safe, legal product just because. On the other hand, this product also takes (currently) lousy pictures, allows one to snap a photo in disallowed places where it may be difficult or impossible to ban cell phones in general just to be "fair" to the cell/camera people.

A bar is a good example. Pretend that I own a bar. I have a cabaret license and have topless dancers. Naturally. I do not allow cameras in the place. This is a normal ban in such establishments. But I allow cell phones. How do I ban a cell phone with a camera in it? Do I try to ban all cell phones to keep out cameras? This would be a tough sell, and I'd need a good bouncer to enforce this. I think I'd lose too many customers over that.

A leather event is another place where all cameras are banned.
Many of the attendees are prominent people who may be embarrassed if it got out that they liked "that" stuff. I can name for us (but I won't) a sitting Federal judge in our District who is gay and likes to be tied and spanked. I can also point out a State Trooper who loves it when you yank and twist his nipples.

You can see where knowledge of their proclivities would cause them distress. Pictorial evidence might well be enough to get them fired (or recalled). So cameras are banned. Cell phones have not been until now. I don't know what they will do about these camera phones.

I can guess that the security people will allow phones but confiscate or eject camera phones, or the users thereof, if they spot them. But what if they miss one?

I can gather a lot of blackmail material with one of those and I doubt I'd get caught. There was enough concern over those "spy cameras" that they used to have that could be easily hidden and took existing light pictures without a flash. True, the pictures could be grainy and out-of-focus at times, but they still did the job. It was only the fact that they never seemed to be used that kept people coming in and back. I tend to be a media slut at such places and don't care, but what of the judges? Or cops? I personally know of two members of Ronald Reagan's advisory panel (on economics, I think it was) who are both bi and submissive. I'm willing to bet Bruces house and farm (but not his doodad collection) that plenty of current people in DC are also like that privately.

End result, these camera phones are going to be a problem until society finds a way to control them or at least deal with both them and the larger issues of privacy and photography.

Brian