A picture of a driver's license is the property of the photographer. Richard Prince is a millionaire for taking pictures of others' intellectual property and then auctioning it off, for example.
Re:A New Digital Manifesto
by aeneasmackenzie on Monday November 04, 2019 @07:53PM
(#21448528)
Which is absurd: It's illegal for me to take several million pictures of a tv show and sell it.
I verified my ID for Freelancer.com once. They wanted a scan of your ID and a picture of you holding up the same ID and a random number they provided. A picture of your ID that someone got off a website is indistinguishable from a picture of a picture of your ID. A picture of you holding your ID is indistinguishable from a picture of you holding a picture of your ID. It could easily have been a deepfake.
I think this is a real problem and the right to communicate isn't stronger or deeper than the right to prevent illegal or provably harmful communications. (yes 'illegal' can become twisted, I'm limiting to just the painfully obvious things that everyone finds unacceptable (except would-be criminals))
(yes 'criminals' is frequently defined in terms of what's already illegal so I'm just making a fine mess here but while we're at it, let's appeal to the expectations of 'decent' people and then we just bounced it back to definition of 'decent' ad nauseum... ok I'm done)