PRIVACY LAWS IN MEDIA: A COMPARISION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND LATIN AMERICA - Term Paper Example

In case he/she fails to do so, the owner files a case against that action. This unlawful act can lead to a jail time in correctional facilities on charges of invading privacy. Up skirting and down blousing are against the law since they are considered as voyeurism. On the other hand, Latin America has not been in sight of terrorist threats like the U.S. Hence the reason for the freedom of recording public areas without issuance of high profile areas set up. Recordings of individuals are allowed as long as the individuals’ integrity is not put into question from those recordings.

As for audio recordings, the United States allows both parties involved in a conversation to have consent that their conversation is being put into recording. In the case where this is not observed, then the recording is considered as a breach of privacy and may be used as evidence of invasion of property. As for the Latin, one party in the conversation has to consent the recording. If this condition is not upheld, the recording is termed as unlawful and may lead to time in jail. In the United States, the rules that legalise the recording of individuals may be overseen if it is a matter of national security.

The use of hidden cameras to acquire information whether for investigation purposes or gathering news reports is still invasion of privacy. Hidden recording without protection from the constitution is just a criminal offence. Surveillance in the bathroom and restroom is illegal. Such recordings take part in movies; people should know that this is staged just for the entertainment purposes. The fourth amendment also protects the U.S citizens from search or seizure that may be of an electronic nature.

On the other hand, Latin America does not criminate the act of recording public areas with a hidden camera as long as the images on the hidden camera are not used for public use, or taints the image of an individual. If it results in such actions it is rated as unlawful. Similar to the Americans, surveillance of washrooms and bathrooms is also illegal. Wiretapping is regarded as the transfer of oral information from one point to another or from the point of origin to another distant point where the conversation occurs.

Any interception of any kind for instance, like that one of a cell phone service provider will be considered unlawful and may only is wavered if the subscriber’s call is a threat to the nation (Mary et al). As for some Latin American countries, the above said case may not apply since cell phone service providers don’t have warranties to play big brother but still do. It has to be understood that if and when one party has consented and is aware that the conversation is getting “tapped” then he is protected.

This is not the case in Latin America because only the United States allow for both parties to consent it. In the case of criminal law, the definitions are similar. They both define Criminal law as the section of the law that deals with crime, and the provision of the legal punishment of criminal offence that is in relation to the crime committed. The only notable difference is the punishment preceding the crime. For instance, in the United States the jury gives its verdict on the crime committed and the punishment may vary when a juror doesn’t agree with the verdict.

A death sentence may change to life imprisonment