| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/02/2012 01:58:44 AM · #1 |
Apparently some guy has been going around filming people to prove a point: We're always being recorded.
What's interesting, of course, is the reactions he gets - people seem to be either ignorant of the constant surveillance, or more bothered because it's a human who is unknown to them.
Even I would probably ask what the hell the fellow thought he was up to.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2012 06:55:05 AM · #2 |
My favorite part is the dude having a private conversation in public.
edit - I found my new calling in life.
Just watched video 3, and you don't know how many times I've had security tell me I can't shoot photos from public towards their private property. Bunch of fucktards.
I love when people think they have these magical rights that don't exist.
Message edited by author 2012-11-02 07:03:39. |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 08:09:14 AM · #3 |
He's going into a lot of private properties though. Does he not need permission to film there (like the college he went into)
I love when he was in the church of scientology in vid 3, when he was telling them he wouldn't want to join their cult anyway as they weren't being very nice to him. lol |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 08:26:08 AM · #4 |
That was hilarious! Great post.
I wonder how I would have reacted if I was one of the unwitting subjects... |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 08:28:49 AM · #5 |
| Simple fix, turn your camera on him (phone, etc)... I would be willing to bet that he would run before you could hit record. |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 09:02:00 AM · #6 |
I watched the first set of videos. He must've only added in the crazy people. He must live in the town of Uptightsville. It's not like he was taking videos of people in the washroom, or secretive upskirt videos.
What would my reaction have been? I would've asked him what type of video he was making. He probably would've replied, 'Just a video.' And I would've told him I'm not a very interesting subject, but thought maybe he could edit me into something interesting. If he kept on taking video for a while I would've felt pressured to do something entertaining.
I'd also want to know where he posts his videos so I could see myself later. I'm so vain.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2012 09:08:54 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by Venser:
My favorite part is the dude having a private conversation in public.
|
But the guy came and sat at his table!!
|
|
|
|
11/02/2012 09:13:32 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Venser:
My favorite part is the dude having a private conversation in public. |
But the guy came and sat at his table!! |
His reaction was so over the top, though, it made me wonder if it was staged. I can't imagine someone getting so rank over that. That whole town is going to die of stress and heart attacks. I did like his line about the horse he rode in on. :-D
|
|
|
|
11/02/2012 09:17:38 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Venser:
My favorite part is the dude having a private conversation in public. |
But the guy came and sat at his table!! |
His reaction was so over the top, though, it made me wonder if it was staged. I can't imagine someone getting so rank over that. That whole town is going to die of stress and heart attacks. I did like his line about the horse he rode in on. :-D |
I don't know. I'd think it was kind of creepy someone getting in my face with the video camera. From a distance wouldn't bother me that much -- but right in my face would definitely feel creepy. Especially when he doesn't explain and won't leave.
But maybe it's a female thing. I've had guys following me a couple of times and it is very creepy.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2012 09:26:39 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Venser:
My favorite part is the dude having a private conversation in public. |
But the guy came and sat at his table!! |
His reaction was so over the top, though, it made me wonder if it was staged. I can't imagine someone getting so rank over that. That whole town is going to die of stress and heart attacks. I did like his line about the horse he rode in on. :-D |
I don't know. I'd think it was kind of creepy someone getting in my face with the video camera. From a distance wouldn't bother me that much -- but right in my face would definitely feel creepy. Especially when he doesn't explain and won't leave.
But maybe it's a female thing. I've had guys following me a couple of times and it is very creepy. |
I probably watch too much "Just For Laughs Gags" on TV. It's shot mostly in Montreal, and the public is the target. So I'm partly desensitized, and being a male helps. That guy was recording males, though. I wouldn't blame women if they were concerned, that would be creepy in my books, that's a whole different story. That's the sexist/racist Slippy talking.
Message edited by author 2012-11-02 09:27:21.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2012 09:31:17 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Venser:
My favorite part is the dude having a private conversation in public.
|
But the guy came and sat at his table!! |
I didn't see anyone else sitting there.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2012 09:38:04 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Venser:
My favorite part is the dude having a private conversation in public. |
But the guy came and sat at his table!! |
I didn't see anyone else sitting there. |
Sometimes my family of four will plonk down at a table with some stranger(s) at festivals. We even chat with them. And we've never been threatened! Luckily we don't live in Uptightsville.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2012 09:51:42 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
He must live in the town of Uptightsville. |
he's in my neck of the woods, Seattle lol |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 11:07:48 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by smardaz:
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
He must live in the town of Uptightsville. |
he's in my neck of the woods, Seattle lol |
He he, no kidding Jason. I was starting to say to myself these are a bunch of uptight people on the eastside and then 2:30 into the third string of videos shows the car park across the street from my office where my car is parked right now! You can even see the awning to the venue where I have some images on display right now behind the guy calling the police- small world!
It's true there are cameras everywhere, but most of them are not as distracting as this guy I think. I admit I laughed when the one guy said "you even look like a DumbF***k". That comment makes me wonder if part of what is annoying people is this guy really does look creepy... |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 03:24:05 PM · #15 |
Curiosity killed me.
Washington has a two party consent law for audio recordings.
It looks like his video recording of people while he's on public property is always legal, while his recording of their voices is illegal.
In Ontario, it's only a one-way consent, and presumably as the videographer, he would consent on his side, otherwise he's a fool.
Message edited by author 2012-11-02 15:24:21. |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 05:50:46 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Venser:
Curiosity killed me.
Washington has a two party consent law for audio recordings.
It looks like his video recording of people while he's on public property is always legal, while his recording of their voices is illegal.
In Ontario, it's only a one-way consent, and presumably as the videographer, he would consent on his side, otherwise he's a fool. |
I would think those laws would apply if you were secretly video/audio taping conversations. If you had a camera out, it's pretty obvious you're recording. He could wear a shirt that says, "If you talk to me, you're consenting to have your audio recorded."
Of course, I'm not a lawyer. |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 06:02:15 PM · #17 |
The laws on voice recording are intended to keep secret recordings illegal, hence the warnings and beeps in phone conversations being recorded. If the recording device is in plain sight, I doubt that you say you were not aware of it.
If you are curious about video monitoring legalities, the Constitution Project has a nice write up. |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 06:39:11 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Venser:
In Ontario, it's only a one-way consent, and presumably as the videographer, he would consent on his side, otherwise he's a fool. |
One party consent addresses only those conversations which involves the person doing the recording. In this scenario, he could not legally record that portion of the conversation where the individual was speaking to another party.
I am many years removed from any involvement relative to wire-tapping and the like, but I do believe that one could record conversations, but that disclosure of same was illegal... I would have to do some research on this to provide you with a definite answer but I am to lazy to do this at this time... maybe later.
One must also consider that in Canada, although it is legal for Canadians to record conversations that they are involved in, it is illegal for them to possess surreptitious recording devices. While this is not the case in this instance, this is an important factor to take into consideration before starting to records other peoples conversation, even in a one party consent scenario.
Ray |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 09:54:26 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Venser:
In Ontario, it's only a one-way consent, and presumably as the videographer, he would consent on his side, otherwise he's a fool. |
One party consent addresses only those conversations which involves the person doing the recording. In this scenario, he could not legally record that portion of the conversation where the individual was speaking to another party.
I am many years removed from any involvement relative to wire-tapping and the like, but I do believe that one could record conversations, but that disclosure of same was illegal... I would have to do some research on this to provide you with a definite answer but I am to lazy to do this at this time... maybe later.
One must also consider that in Canada, although it is legal for Canadians to record conversations that they are involved in, it is illegal for them to possess surreptitious recording devices. While this is not the case in this instance, this is an important factor to take into consideration before starting to records other peoples conversation, even in a one party consent scenario.
Ray |
Hey Ray,
My understanding of Ontario law after reading everything today was that it was permissible to have one way consent for any conversation. I'll reread it again, but I don't think I missed anything. That being said, you provide a link that says otherwise and I'll change my viewpoint since I'd be in the wrong. My cursory research was that it was permissible in Ontario, but not in Quebec. I didn't look at any other provinces because my chances of visiting them are pretty slim.
CS |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 10:55:01 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
The laws on voice recording are intended to keep secret recordings illegal, hence the warnings and beeps in phone conversations being recorded. If the recording device is in plain sight, I doubt that you say you were not aware of it.
If you are curious about video monitoring legalities, the Constitution Project has a nice write up. |
Michigan is a two party consent state...when I speak on the phone with anyone who informs me that "this call may be monitored or recorded" as soon as someone comes on the line, I inform them that I definitely am recording the call. It's amazing how many banks, CC companies et al have objections to their calls being recorded by anyone but them. |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 11:04:12 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Venser:
In Ontario, it's only a one-way consent, and presumably as the videographer, he would consent on his side, otherwise he's a fool. |
One party consent addresses only those conversations which involves the person doing the recording. In this scenario, he could not legally record that portion of the conversation where the individual was speaking to another party.
I am many years removed from any involvement relative to wire-tapping and the like, but I do believe that one could record conversations, but that disclosure of same was illegal... I would have to do some research on this to provide you with a definite answer but I am to lazy to do this at this time... maybe later.
One must also consider that in Canada, although it is legal for Canadians to record conversations that they are involved in, it is illegal for them to possess surreptitious recording devices. While this is not the case in this instance, this is an important factor to take into consideration before starting to records other peoples conversation, even in a one party consent scenario.
Ray |
Hey Ray,
My understanding of Ontario law after reading everything today was that it was permissible to have one way consent for any conversation. I'll reread it again, but I don't think I missed anything. That being said, you provide a link that says otherwise and I'll change my viewpoint since I'd be in the wrong. My cursory research was that it was permissible in Ontario, but not in Quebec. I didn't look at any other provinces because my chances of visiting them are pretty slim.
CS |
The crux of the matter is that one party consent is indeed valid, but only if one is party to the conversation. In one of the scenarios, the cameraman could be recording part of a conversation which he was not involved in (when the fellow was talking on the phone to someone else) and if the gentleman in question did not engage in a conversation with the cameraman, then the recording of that conversation would be illegal.
Consideration ought also be given to the last paragraph, which I believe is still valid today, although I doubt it is enforced.
I can look for case law, but it won't be today.
Have a good one.
Ray
|
|
|
|
11/02/2012 11:04:12 PM · #22 |
I must have sticky fingers... I posted this twice.
... don't go there. :O)
Ray
Message edited by author 2012-11-02 23:05:30. |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 11:09:27 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
I must have sticky fingers... I posted this twice.
... don't go there. :O)
Ray |
Ohh.. I went there. ;) |
|
|
|
11/02/2012 11:10:24 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
I must have sticky fingers... I posted this twice.
... don't go there. :O)
Ray |
Ohh.. I went there. ;) |
...I would have won the pool on that one. :O)
Ray |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 11:06:31 AM EDT.
