I like to take photos but sometimes I wonder if I should or shouldn't be taking a photo of a particular subject. It's a debatable question but something I think about. Especially when traveling.
I'm not a lawyer but I have attempted to understand what is fair and what should be avoided. As far as I'm concerned, anyone may take photographs of anything when in a public place (not to be confused with a private place opened to the public). Although property owners may prohibit photography on their property, they have no right to prohibit you from photographing their property from another location.
Same rules apply to people. Anyone can be photographed without consent providing they are in public and not attempting to be hidden (dressing rooms, restrooms, inside their own home etc).
Now, I personally have never had a problem taking photos. Nobody has ever questioned me and although the public place rule may hold up with the law, that doesn't mean you'll never be confronted by someone else. This is exactly what happened to Peter Rukavina.
A couple weeks ago, Peter took a photo of an illegally parked luxury SUV and posted it on his website. The photo was taken on the main street in downtown Charlottetown and was entertaining with no harm done. right? Well, this past weekend Peter was confronted about the photo. Not by the police but by the disgruntled owner of that SUV who attempted to be intimidating by sending Peters' morning coffee across the table (full story). I suppose this is the big bully way from a wealthy business man that wants you to know he didn't appreciate it.
Should Peter have taken and posted the photo? Absolutely and I would have too if had the chance. Regardless of the situation and who owns the car, it makes for an interesting and humorous photo subject.
As for the SUV owner. It has gone from a simple silly photo to being a ridiculous and shameful act of aggression that people are now talking about.