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

61–70 of 102 posts

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

#61

Post by rdtsc »

somenameforme wrote: post #34
lxgr wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not the interpretation of pretty much any court in the history of the United States. In fact, the opposite is true: The government forcing private individuals or companies to tolerate speech on their premises or carry it in their media is considered compelled speech and as such a First Amendment violation itself. Whether that’s still the best way of doing things is a different question, but that’s what the Fir…

This is incorrect. An important case is Marsh vs Alabama. [1] A person was distributing fliers in a 'company town.' Company towns were essentially privately owned 'towns' on privately owned property. They were told to stop and leave, they refused, and were arrested for trespass. The case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court where it was thrown out. Wiki has a pretty nice synopsis of the critical point: --- Th…

In case of a mall however it didn’t hold up:

> In Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner, the Supreme Court distinguished a private shopping mall from the company town in Marsh and held that the mall had not been sufficiently dedicated to public use for First Amendment free speech rights to apply within it.

A company towns per-se don’t exist anymore in US? There are developer owned neighborhoods though. Mixed zoned areas with everything owned by a corporate entity, so could apply there perhaps?

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

#62

Post by hello_computer »

hallway_monitor wrote: post #45
tstrimple wrote: post #42

Way too much circle jerking in this thread over what the first amendment means as if people a few hundred years ago had a better grasp on what is right and wrong in today’s context than anyone living and breathing and thinking today. In my opinion the deference given to what long dead people wrote is a cause of many of this country’s problems. It’s supposed to be a living constitution and we’re still trying to divine…

I don’t give a shit about first amendment interpretations and I agree completely that laws need an update. How about this: ban biometric detection. Ban facial recognition. Throw the CEO in jail if a company breaks the ban. That would be a good use of government power. Fuck the surveillance state, it’s not a place I want to live - and we don’t have to accept it.

i’d go a step further

https://youtu.be/TMHCw3RqulY

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

#63

Post by sejje »

brookst wrote: post #38
thayne wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Wait so the 5th amendment protects diaries from snooping siblings?

4th you meant?

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

#64

Post by t0mas88 »

conradfr wrote: post #51
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.

Is that legal? This would be a clear GDPR violation in Europe.

You could probably argue a legitimate interest if you're collecting face recognition data on proven hooligans, but scraping pictures of people that have not been to your venue off a website clearly isn't a legitimate interest for such privacy invasion.

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

#65

Post by t0mas88 »

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…

Netherlands if you qualify as a knowledge worker, which is super easy for anyone with a university degree. This could change since the new government isn't very enthusiastic about it, but for now it's a straight "Welcome and here is a 30% tax break for your first 5 years" as long as you meet a quite low minimum income number. And even lower if you come in on a student visum first, they recognise that a starter job is lower paid.

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

#66

Post by thrance »

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 conservatives voices were always the ones getting the most exposure online. Their whining back then was purely political and completely unfounded. And now that they're in power and actively censoring people, it should be apparent to all how this constant appeal to free speech and the 1st amendment was deeply hypocritical.

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

#67

Post by Arcuru »

Is there an image of the shirt?

I assume that embedded Instagram post is a pic of the shirt, but I don't have Instagram so it's a big blank box with a link to "View this post on Instagram".

It's ironic that on this post about a large corporation abusing its power, they are requiring the user to use Instagram to get the full context..

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

#68

Post by rahimnathwani »

t0mas88 wrote: post #64
conradfr wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Is that legal? This would be a clear GDPR violation in Europe. You could probably argue a legitimate interest if you're collecting face recognition data on proven hooligans, but scraping pictures of people that have not been to your venue off a website clearly isn't a legitimate interest for such privacy invasion.

If a 3-person law firm is suing you, and the law firm has a web site with photos of its 3 lawyers, it seems reasonable to add those photos to a pinboard at your entrance, so security staff know to look our for those folks, and not to allow them to come into your place of business (unless they arrive for an appointment, e.g. for a deposition).

What if the law firm has thousands of employees and you don't know exactly which ones might be working on your case at any given time? What if your entrance has a high volume of visitors and it's not practical for your security team to stop each of those people for minutes, whilst they check them against a set of thousands of photos?

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

#69

Post by sieabahlpark »

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…

[dead]

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

#70

Post by ben_w »

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…

> As an aside, what's the easiest country in the EU for immigration?

The one(s) whose language(s) you already speak, unless you're rich enough for an investor visa: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigrant_investor_programs#In...

(While Germany may be tempting especially with all the English used in tourist areas, be aware it's not for nothing that native German speakers use in real life a phrase which translates as "The German language is difficult").

Most of the EU, but not Denmark or Ireland, also theoretically have the Blue Card scheme; but I say "theoretically" because that's a bureaucratic streamlining, the actual granting is still done at national level and from what I've heard different countries grant them at different rates: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Card_(European_Union)

Post reply on HN