Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 634 posts

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#41

Post by brokenodometer »

hirundo wrote: post #10
docdeek wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on the country. Filming someone in public where they are the subject of the video (or photo) without their consent is illegal in France. If this had been recorded in France instead of Australia, the rights of the subject (the woman) to her image would trump any right to film in a public place of a Tiktok creator.

Derek Chauvin would appreciate that.

This law does not apply to filming the police. See the authoritative French government interpretation here:

http://www.montpellier-journal.fr/fichiers/circulairephotosp...

And see here where the French Constitutional Council struck down a law that would have criminalized filming with the intent to cause harassment of officers:

https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20210520-french-court-...

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#42

Post by naillo »

prepend wrote: post #27

I thought media releases were required for image rights before video could be commercialized? I always find these videos cheesy and fake and assumed they had received legal permission (if not hired actors to pose). If these jerks are filming and posing unwilling participants in their product, that seems pretty easy to remedy. I remember a few years ago pornhub had a decision to get positive consent from people in vid…

If you film in public places (depending on the country) it's often legal. Still really rude though and should be socially discouraged.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#43

Post by starfallg »

scotty79 wrote: post #24
macns wrote: post #15

> He wholeheartedly apologises to Maree if she was offended by what he did and urges her to contact him privately so he can personally apologise. > If she requests him to take down the video he will do that. The video should've been taken down already.

Honest thing to do would be to disclose the profits from the video and share it with her.

The honest thing to do would be to donate any profits to charity and make a real apology. Sharing profits would just encourage this type of distasteful behaviour that social media seems to be encouraging.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#45

Post by nonrandomstring »

prepend wrote: post #27

I thought media releases were required for image rights before video could be commercialized? I always find these videos cheesy and fake and assumed they had received legal permission (if not hired actors to pose). If these jerks are filming and posing unwilling participants in their product, that seems pretty easy to remedy. I remember a few years ago pornhub had a decision to get positive consent from people in vid…

> I like how the creator offered to take the video down, if asked. No apology and no offer to give back the money he made from the video.

I'm sure he would, so long as she gave back the flowers.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#46

Post by duxup »

drakonka wrote: post #16

The video itself was quite off-putting when I first saw it. He didn't even just kindly offer her flowers. He _tricked_ her into taking them by making it sound like he just wanted her to hold them for him. She was actually being kind to him by doing him a favor, and then he basically ran away and stuck her with them. That's not kind at all, it's pushy and exploitative. As someone who doesn't usually like to accept gif…

It seems like the video is for the creator and the audience… and that’s it.

There seems to be little interest in the actual person given the flowers other than as a prop.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#48

Post by headsoup »

naillo wrote: post #35
drakonka wrote: post #16

The video itself was quite off-putting when I first saw it. He didn't even just kindly offer her flowers. He _tricked_ her into taking them by making it sound like he just wanted her to hold them for him. She was actually being kind to him by doing him a favor, and then he basically ran away and stuck her with them. That's not kind at all, it's pushy and exploitative. As someone who doesn't usually like to accept gif…

It's funny how these videos say they're intended to spread love and encourage random acts of kindness, but the actual effect of them is decreasing trust in strangers (that they might be filming us for their tiktok). This makes me not trust anyone that goes up to me in the street.

I would like to ask this tiktok guy how often he does his random acts of kindness without the camera rolling...

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#49

Post by pessimizer »

Dracophoenix wrote: post #38
hef19898 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a person is the main subject of a picture, the photographer (or videographer) needa consent of the model to use that image or vidoe. Already under current law in most places. And most legitimate publishers ask for proof of consent when buying, before publishing such pictures. That social media firms don't care is not a big surprise. Edit: And that influencers think they are above existing laws when it comes to con…

I can't speak for Australia, but in the United States, there is generally no right to privacy in a public area. The model consent forms are more of a CYA than a legal requirement. It's useful as evidence to dismiss charges rather than go through the hassle and expense of a full trial. In addition, requiring the consent of people in public places would make it difficult for individuals to record illegal conduct commit…

> make it difficult for individuals to record illegal conduct committed by others, especially law enforcement.

The states have had no difficulty in specifically making it illegal to record law enforcement, so they understand exceptions. You can easily require consent from people while as an institution giving consent for law enforcement to be filmed.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#50

Post by hirundo »

brokenodometer wrote: post #41
hirundo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Derek Chauvin would appreciate that.

This law does not apply to filming the police. See the authoritative French government interpretation here: http://www.montpellier-journal.fr/fichiers/circulairephotosp... And see here where the French Constitutional Council struck down a law that would have criminalized filming with the intent to cause harassment of officers: https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20210520-french-court-...

What would the legal status of the video be if it also contained images of George Floyd?
Post reply on HN