41–50 of 767 posts
> This is nonsense, for a number of reasons. Clearly, one should be able to exist in society, including going outside one’s own home, without needing to accept this kind of thing.
In the US the legal doctrine is no privacy at all in public spaces (a lot more expansive than that actually), that's probably where those comments come from.
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…
We had this idea that privacy violation is like pollution. But now it's like how our generation is used to plastic in the ocean and never seeing all the stars. It's just life.
Regardless of that, some strangers think it's fine to take pictures of them in public... sometimes they ask first, sometimes they don't.
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…
Both my kids (and me) found it very off-putting, so there's some anecdata that at least some young kids still feel it's an invasion of privacy.
Maybe not all is lost.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. It wouldn't be nice to solve it, because it would mean nobody could ever take a picture of anything where there might be anyone recognizable in the background, without getting them to sign some kind of model release first. Is that what you want? For innocent photography in public to be essentially outlawed?
Or you know, not making it public. And if you might need to make the photo public, you could blur the faces.
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…
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.
To that extent, the hobbyists who like to create content for the internet should be asking for consent since their footage, and arguably their clout, depends on the participation of everybody else in the group. Otherwise they're just traipsing around a private plot of land all kitted up but with nobody to shoot. If they're monetising that content then they are profiting from the OP's likeness.
This is not far removed from the (fully understandable) blowback on influencers recording themselves (and often other people for rage-induced clout) inside gyms. These are also not public places.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Think bigger - public spaces, streets, in general. Would be nice to solve this.
I disagree. It wouldn't be nice to solve it, because it would mean nobody could ever take a picture of anything where there might be anyone recognizable in the background, without getting them to sign some kind of model release first. Is that what you want? For innocent photography in public to be essentially outlawed?
Yes. I would like to go back to a time before everyone had 3 different cameras with them and the ability to share those photos to a global network so third parties can use that data to track what I am doing literally everywhere.
I no longer leave my house except for strictly necessary obligations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Think bigger - public spaces, streets, in general. Would be nice to solve this.
I disagree. It wouldn't be nice to solve it, because it would mean nobody could ever take a picture of anything where there might be anyone recognizable in the background, without getting them to sign some kind of model release first. Is that what you want? For innocent photography in public to be essentially outlawed?