Pervs in the Massachusetts are rejoicing and women are put on notice to not wear skirts after the state's Supreme Court ruled in favor of a man who was arrested after being caught taking up skirt photos of women.

This all stems from a 2010 case against Michael Robertson. He never contested he took the photos of the women, but said he didn't violate the state's 'Peeping Tom' laws. Robertson claimed the laws only apply to women in any state of undress, nude, or partially nude. Whereas the alleged photos were not in those context and they were taken in public versus in private as the law states.

Well, the court agreed saying the following in their decision reads:

We conclude that (the law), as written, as the defendant suggests, is concerned with proscribing Peeping Tom voyeurism of people who are completely or partially undressed and, in particular, such voyeurism enhanced by electronic devices. (The law) does not apply to photographing (or videotaping or electronically surveilling) persons who are fully clothed and, in particular, does not reach the type of upskirting that the defendant is charged with attempting to accomplish on the MBTA.

At the core of the Commonwealth's argument to the contrary is the proposition that a woman, and in particular a woman riding on a public trolley, has a reasonable expectation of privacy in not having a stranger secretly take photographs up her skirt. The proposition is eminently reasonable, but (the law) in its current form does not address it.

So essentially, this allows any perv with a phone camera to snap away at women wearing skirts.