<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Cameras</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/cameras/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 01:55:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>A lesson from GoPro: Don&#8217;t mess with Reddit</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/20/a_lesson_from_gopro_dont_mess_with_reddit/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/20/a_lesson_from_gopro_dont_mess_with_reddit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 20:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GoPro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cameras]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reddit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DMCA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[digital millenium copyright act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[digitalrev.com]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13247216</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A weird copyright dispute tells us that when online controversies blow up, damage control starts with social media]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here's another piece of evidence that social media rules all. Copyright <a href="https://twitter.com/normative/status/314428594950664194">watchdogs started ringing the alarm bell </a>on Wednesday when the news broke that the camera company GoPro had filed a DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) notice demanding that a camera-focused website called DigitalRev.com pull down a <em>review</em> comparing recent GoPro and Sony "action" cameras.</p><p>The text of the takedown notice appeared to indicate that the use of GoPro <a href="http://www.digitalrev.com/article/gopro-hero-3-vs-sony/Njk3MDQ3MDg_A">trademarks in a review</a> was a copyright violation. This is the kind of thing that a) raises hackles on the Web, and b) is completely ridiculous. If anything deserves fair use protection, it is product reviews. But the way the DMCA works, DigitalRev.com's Internet provider is required to shut down access to the offending website within 24 hours, no questions asked, unless the URL is taken down.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/20/a_lesson_from_gopro_dont_mess_with_reddit/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/20/a_lesson_from_gopro_dont_mess_with_reddit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal court OKs warrantless use of hidden cameras</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/31/federal_court_oks_warrantless_use_of_hidden_cameras/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/31/federal_court_oks_warrantless_use_of_hidden_cameras/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2012 14:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Surveillance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cameras]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marijuana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Private Property]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13058369</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Surveillance cameras can be placed on a person's property without permission]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A federal court ruling Tuesday served yet another blow to U.S. citizens' dwindling expectations of privacy from government surveillance. A U.S. district judge sided with the Justice Department to rule that it was reasonable for DEA agents to enter a property without permission or a warrant  to install multiple "covert digital surveillance cameras." (The case in question involved finding evidence in a rural property of mass marijuana plant growing.)</p><p>The Wisconsin-based case saw video evidence from hidden cameras placed around the property of Manuel Mendoza and Marco Magana, where 1,000 marijuana plants were found growing. The two men face possible life imprisonment after Judge William Griesbach ruled that "the DEA's warrantless surveillance did not violate the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and requires that warrants describe the place that's being searched,"<a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57542510-38/court-oks-warrantless-use-of-hidden-surveillance-cameras/"> CNET reported.</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/10/31/federal_court_oks_warrantless_use_of_hidden_cameras/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/31/federal_court_oks_warrantless_use_of_hidden_cameras/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Weird news: Cameras watching cameras that are watching you</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/17/weird_news_cameras_watching_cameras_that_are_watching_you/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/17/weird_news_cameras_watching_cameras_that_are_watching_you/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2012 20:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cameras]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13014302</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Maryland county police force has a unique solution to a unique problem]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WTOP <a href="http://www.wtop.com/41/3034979/New-cameras-to-watch-cameras-that-watch-you">reports</a> that up to six people have damaged speed cameras in Prince George County, and the police force is finally fed up with it. "We've taken the additional step of marking our cameras to let people know that there is surveillance," said Maj. Robert V. Liberati.</p><p>The cost to replace a speed camera in Prince George's County, Md.: $30,000 to $100,000, and since April 2012 they've been shot, vandalized and mangled. But then someone lit a camera on fire and burned it down. The new solution is training security cameras on the speed cameras that are there to deter people from breaking the speed limit.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/09/17/weird_news_cameras_watching_cameras_that_are_watching_you/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/09/17/weird_news_cameras_watching_cameras_that_are_watching_you/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The hand-held camera you have to have</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/08/05/best_point_and_shoot_camera_salpart/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/08/05/best_point_and_shoot_camera_salpart/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Aug 2012 15:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Wirecutter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cameras]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fuji]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Olympus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sony]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12972386</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Sony RX100 Is the best point-and shoot-camera. Here's how it holds up against Fuji, Canon and Olympus models]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If I could have any point-and-shoot camera, the one I'd get is the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00889ST2G/?tag=saloncom08-20">Sony DSC-RX100</a>.</p><p><a href="http://thewirecutter.com/"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/partners/ID_thewirecutter.jpg" alt="The Wirecutter" align="left" /></a></p><p>It's $650*, which puts it in the price range of cheap DSLRs, but make no mistake, this is the best pocketable camera possible at the moment.</p><p>(*We've got a budget pick at the bottom)</p><p>When you go out hunting for a super high-quality point-and-shoot camera, there are generally three things to keep an eye out for: sensor size, lens speed, and the body. The RX100 has major points in its favor in all three areas, which is what pushes it into being our number one pick.</p><p>By far the most impressive stat the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00889ST2G/?tag=saloncom08-20">RX100</a> can boast is its lens.</p><p>The RX100 has a maximum aperture of f/1.8 — which is an excellent thing, and lets in a huge amount of light. The RX100 has a larger aperture than any other camera in this class, which is a huge point in its favor.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/08/05/best_point_and_shoot_camera_salpart/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/08/05/best_point_and_shoot_camera_salpart/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
