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

What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

neilzone.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 767 posts

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#351

Post by andiareso »

jen729w wrote: post #11

I get it, but the alternative is what? Get model release forms from anyone in a public space every time you turn your video camera on? Who's to say how much of you I have in the shot? Do you feature? Did you flash by? Are you blurred? Recognisable? I was shooting video of a car park exit last year. (I was trying to prove to the shopping centre owners that it was dangerous.) Mundane footage. Some lady drives out in he…

Yes? I'm not sure I understand here.

If you are doing it because you're a creator on YouTube and you are getting paid through views on YouTube, aren't you then required to get release info? If it's for personal use, sure thing, but when you are making money on it then you should absolutely get releases and default to bluring non-released individuals.

I think the bigger issue is that our laws (in the US at least) haven't really caught up with this gig/creator economy. It would be no different than a blockbuster film group filming a war/battle sequence and having to get permission ahead of time from the location and individuals.

My work will have signs up or ask explicitly if they are filming and intend to publish. If you go to a private org with the intention of filming, you should follow the same rules for a full-budget production group.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#352

Post by webstrand »

greenavocado wrote: post #217
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People were pissed once they figured out that private conversations were uploading love to the internet. Audio is different from video. This is technically illegal, as consent is explicitly required in the law for audio recording.

Most states in the United States allow one one-party consent for audio recordings.

Under US federal law one-party consent requires that you actually be a party to the conversation. This is why most security cameras do not record audio.

If you're wandering around livestreaming and picking up conversations you're not a participant in, it's a violation of federal wiretapping laws.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#353

Post by GJim »

carlosjobim wrote: post #311
bluecheese452 wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of the weirdest takes I have ever heard.

[flagged]

> Those include not trying to impress strange rules on guests you invite to an event.

I think you will find it is both good etiquette and very common to make polite requests ("rules") of guests you invite..... whether these be to 'bring a bottle', 'smoke outside', 'wear black tie', 'wear your birthday suit' or 'don't film us'.

If you can't accommodate such requests, don't go.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#354

Post by pixl97 »

zokier wrote: post #113

It is funny how insular and US centric many of the comments here are. In fact many countries do have legislation requiring consent in many scenarios for photographing or publishing photos. And it turns out that it is not actually very problematic. Wikimedia has some examples, but I'm sure it is not comprehensive: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_...

Because the US has other laws that make the kind of laws you're talking about very difficult. You have to look at the laws together as a part of a system and not a one off set of actions.

In addition laws in the US tend to protect the rich very well and get wholesale ignored for the poor. That is Jeffrey Bezos will punish you with the full extent of the law for taking a video of him beating a baby fur seal to death with a bat, while star-wars kid will be begging for venmo donations in order to get thousands of copies of video taken down while law enforcement ignores the situation.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#355

Post by discomrobertul8 »

Tade0 wrote: post #247
crazygringo wrote: post #14

The answer seems pretty simple. Ask your teammates not to take videos, or find a different group or a different hobby. But since they genuinely enjoy posting the videos, and there's nothing wrong with that, you're probably the one who's going to have move on. You're entitled to not want videos of you taken in public places showing up online. But you're not entitled to getting that outcome.

There's also the option of having a detailed image of a penis on your clothing so that any sort of social media app will R-rate a video featuring you.

Disney characters work too, from what I hear.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#356

Post by crazygringo »

callc wrote: post #282
jen729w wrote: post #11

I get it, but the alternative is what? Get model release forms from anyone in a public space every time you turn your video camera on? Who's to say how much of you I have in the shot? Do you feature? Did you flash by? Are you blurred? Recognisable? I was shooting video of a car park exit last year. (I was trying to prove to the shopping centre owners that it was dangerous.) Mundane footage. Some lady drives out in he…

Basic human decency. Just as the author says: “Publishing someone’s photo online, without their consent, without another strong justification, just because they happen to be in view of one’s camera lens, feels wrong to me.” It doesn’t fall to the legal level, but a social rules level. People who obnoxiously recording people in public, even if 100% legal, and disregard the wishes and conform of others around them dese…

I have no problem with that, but there are a lot of commenters here arguing that it should be enforced at a legal level, rather than a social rules level.

For a forum that tends to trend libertarian, I'm genuinely surprised by the level of enthusiasm for using the government to police the photos people take and share of people in public spaces.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#357

Post by NoSalt »

This is an issue a lot of gyms are facing; idiot "influencers" coming in and not caring who or what they film. It is really up to the private establishment to set rules for taking images and video within their facilities, but most will allow it because they want that almighty dollar to continue flowing in.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#358

Post by detaro »

OJFord wrote: post #344
detaro wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you should read the entire sentence before replying

I did, have again, and still have no idea what you mean.

It's special because both parts apply to the UK, not just the one you quoted.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#359

Post by eloisant »

eterm wrote: post #29

I wonder if it's a generational or cultural difference present in the comments here. I am sympathetic to the author, and I also find video a bit invasive of privacy in a way that photos aren't. I therefore find the (obviously common) attitude that videos are just "something you need to accept" quite alien, but I wonder how much of that attitude is just comments coming from a younger generation that have grown up with…

It is very much cultural. In the 2000's I moved from Japan where they're very strict about public filming/taking pictures (it's something you don't do, period) to the US where people were uploading photos to Flickr and tagging people there. Completely different worlds, and we're not even talking about Gen Z because none of them were old enough to be even teenagers.

Re: What if I don't want videos of my hobby time available to the world?

#360

Post by card_zero »

mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #343
MontyCarloHall wrote: post #133

Genuinely curious: what concrete negative consequences are there from appearing in the background of other people’s photos/videos, in a full face mask no less? Is he afraid that someone will be able to identify him as engaging in a hobby that some people might be judgmental about, e.g. a potential employer finding the footage and concluding “this guy spends lots of time and money playing a children’s game; he’s clear…

Maybe you just don't want the AI that Google is definitely training to predict video frames to insert your face into AI-generated videos?

That would be the fault of Google.
Post reply on HN