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

Madison Square Garden's surveillance banned this fan over his T-shirt design

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 102 posts

Re: Madison Square Garden's surveillance banned this fan over his T-shirt design

#51

Post by conradfr »

gorgoiler wrote: post #43

If they pulled Miller out of the line and only then checked his photo ID, and the allegation is they used facial recognition to trigger this, then that implies they already had his biometrics in their database. The legal disclaimer shown at the venue implies that the biometrics are collected (and “retained, stored, and converted”) at the venue. That’s clearly only half of the story. They must also be collecting (and…

They scrap adversarial law firms websites for photos of employees to ban them so yeah.

Re: Madison Square Garden's surveillance banned this fan over his T-shirt design

#52

Post by harimau777 »

mingus88 wrote: post #14
zfg wrote: post #2

[flagged]

This is not a 1st amendment issue. This is a late stage capitalism issue where too much power has been consolidated into the hands of too few, and so much as a single comment made publicly can blacklist you from participating in any cultural event for the rest of your life. Think of how many radio stations, venues, internet channels etc have been bought up by megacorp. We have all the bad parts of a Gibson cyberpunk…

While that may be technically correct I don't think it's actually correct. Just because it doesn't violate the 1st amendment doesn't mean it doesn't violate free speech.

Democracy isn't just a form of government, it is also a type of society. Part of being a democratic society is that people are generally able to respectfully express themselves without fear of being punished for unpopular opinions.

Re: Madison Square Garden's surveillance banned this fan over his T-shirt design

#53

Post by harimau777 »

Jiro wrote: post #47
zfg wrote: post #2

[flagged]

I seem to recall that when conservatives were getting banned from social media (or any place else), the prevailing attitude was "it's a private company, and they don't owe you anything, so they can ban someone for any reason they want." Now when it's a sympathetic target suddenly nobody is saying that? People are even invoking the First Amendment, which was laughed at back then.

The difference is that conservatives generally get banned for being disrespectful and hateful. E.g. conservatives generally don't get banned for saying that they disagree with gay marriage, they get banned for using slurs, insulting people, etc.

Re: Madison Square Garden's surveillance banned this fan over his T-shirt design

#55

Post by ranger_danger »

sadeshmukh wrote: post #11
ranger_danger wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

That's got to be the most tenuous argument I've ever seen - the most merchandisey item is a T-shirt.

Maybe I should have been a lawyer.

Re: Madison Square Garden's surveillance banned this fan over his T-shirt design

#56

Post by DrillShopper »

zfg wrote: post #37
mulmen wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is protection by the state. It absolutely is not. In fact it is a restriction on the state. The rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are inherent . They are not derived from the government. We have them by nature of existing. The Bill of Rights prohibits the government from infringing on these inherent rights.

And who in your mind maintains and upholds those rights? It's state institutions. The judiciary is a branch of government. You can assert rights but if you don't have those rights in practice then the assertions don't help you.

Please read the first amendment:

> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It precisely says the government cannot limit your speech and is intentionally silent about everyone else.

Re: Madison Square Garden's surveillance banned this fan over his T-shirt design

#57

Post by pjc50 »

zonkerdonker wrote: post #41
neilv wrote: post #35

> “Frank Miller Jr. made threats against an MSG executive on social media and produced and sold merchandise that was offensive in nature,” Mikyl Cordova, executive vice president of communications and marketing for the company, said in an emailed statement. If he made threats, what were the threats? If he didn't make threats, does this written statement, from a communications executive, to a journalist, intended for…

I'm not a lawyer by any means, but I don't see how it wouldn't be. But realistically, how worth it would it be for this graphic designer to battle a narcissistic, petty billionaire in court? US civil court is truly fucked. Criminal as well, for that matter. Ok, the entire judicial branch really. And the executive branch, and legislative, law enforcement, public health, education.... As an aside, what's the easiest co…

> easiest country in the EU for immigration?

Since the Mediterranean crisis and the Ukraine crisis: none. Although Ireland won't impose a language requirement so you might start there.

Re: Madison Square Garden's surveillance banned this fan over his T-shirt design

#58

Post by pjc50 »

harimau777 wrote: post #52
mingus88 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a 1st amendment issue. This is a late stage capitalism issue where too much power has been consolidated into the hands of too few, and so much as a single comment made publicly can blacklist you from participating in any cultural event for the rest of your life. Think of how many radio stations, venues, internet channels etc have been bought up by megacorp. We have all the bad parts of a Gibson cyberpunk…

While that may be technically correct I don't think it's actually correct. Just because it doesn't violate the 1st amendment doesn't mean it doesn't violate free speech. Democracy isn't just a form of government, it is also a type of society. Part of being a democratic society is that people are generally able to respectfully express themselves without fear of being punished for unpopular opinions.

> Part of being a democratic society is that people are generally able to respectfully express themselves without fear of being punished for unpopular opinions.

Well, yes, but I'd say the more important part is that students are having their visas revoked and being pulled off the street into immigration detention because of social media posts.

Re: Madison Square Garden's surveillance banned this fan over his T-shirt design

#59

Post by rdtsc »

zfg wrote: post #15
mingus88 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a 1st amendment issue. This is a late stage capitalism issue where too much power has been consolidated into the hands of too few, and so much as a single comment made publicly can blacklist you from participating in any cultural event for the rest of your life. Think of how many radio stations, venues, internet channels etc have been bought up by megacorp. We have all the bad parts of a Gibson cyberpunk…

> This is not a 1st amendment issue. It absolutely is. Freedom of speech means free speakers. If you're going to face petty punishments for the rest of your days because your criticized the "wrong" people then you are not a free speaker. If you're serious about a free society that means you have to cop criticism, disrespect, and even mockery, most especially and particularly if you're in a position of power.

> If you're serious about a free society that means you have to cop criticism, disrespect, and even mockery

Government does, but other entities don’t.

I am not saying I agree or like it, just that 1st amendment doesn’t specifically apply here.

The general idea of freedom of speech applies and there may be state, local laws or other federal laws in play. But that’s more “in spirit” and wouldn’t hold up in court.

It’s like people being censored on Facebook or YouTube - “Don’t like it? Build your own Facebook or YouTube, pal”. Here it’s “build your own MSG, pal” I guess.

Re: Madison Square Garden's surveillance banned this fan over his T-shirt design

#60

Post by rdtsc »

thayne wrote: post #17
mingus88 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 1A protects citizens from the government. Presently the government is being systematically dismantled from the inside. Madison Square Garden and its investors have the freedom to bar anyone they see fit on their own property. Their portfolios are only getting larger. That’s late stage capitalism.

It can be both. The intent of 1A is to protect the freedom of speech from those in power. The fact that non-government entities now wield the power to suppress speech doesn't change the fact that this is an infringement of free speech.

> It can be both

It can and perhaps should, I agree. But whether it actually does, I am not sure.

Post reply on HN