• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Holographic Laws

There's also Garak killing Quark (although Quark had approved his use in that case), and Quark making a racy holosuite program with Kira (which was later replaced by Quark's head) in Meridian - something Odo thinks is an arrestable offence (but then Odo is hardly one to stick to the law rather than his own sense of justice)

Finally yet anothere example of the Doctor was Renaissance Man, the 3rd episode of season 7 where the doctor goes bad and nobody punishes him. He uses the image of various crewmembers, and knocks them out while he pretends to be them. At the end he has a sulk and all is better.
 
GTA isn't based on real people though. Every time someone catches another crewmember messing around with holodeck versions of themselves, they are appalled and disgusted. And justifiably so. It's a violation of their privacy.

No, it's not an invasion of privacy. Using a person's image against their express consent is not an invasion of privacy. It might be something else - like Nimoy's copyright/trademark infringement lawsuit against Heinekin - but it's not an invasion of privacy.

Unless you want to discuss the lengths a person goes to in order to get said holographic images. THAT might constitute invasion of privacy but only if the images could not be compiled from other sources.
 
No, it's not an invasion of privacy. Using a person's image against their express consent is not an invasion of privacy. It might be something else - like Nimoy's copyright/trademark infringement lawsuit against Heinekin - but it's not an invasion of privacy.

Unless you want to discuss the lengths a person goes to in order to get said holographic images. THAT might constitute invasion of privacy but only if the images could not be compiled from other sources.

Nods.

So images taken in public (as for instance Leah's from Galaxy's Child, or even Barclay's) would be legal (though morally questionable), but hiding hidden cameras in someone's quarters (or public restrooms) to capture more 'intimate' records, wouldn't be legal?
 
That's how our laws are now, right?

I'm not even sure Leah Brahms would be or should be considered morally questionable on the surface. The initial idea was to use the program as a teaching tool or simulation. Like Barkley discussing science with Einstein. Or an entertainment simulation like Data's poker game with Stephen Hawking.

Does the fact that a person is long dead wave the rights to use their image?
 
Plus, conjuring up Leah wasn't even Geordi's idea, the computer sprung that on him and he rolled with the situation.
 
Like some of the other early holodeck stories, I think it was a good exploration of getting caught up in virtual reality, before the term "virtual reality" was probably in most people's lexicons.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top