Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
he never sticks a camera in public faces...... he will point them at public servants doing their work,... 2 different things.
He literally did that to the commissioners wife at her private home who is NOT a public servant. So just stop with the defending of this felon attention monger.
He literally did that to the commissioners wife at her private home who is NOT a public servant. So just stop with the defending of this felon attention monger.
He isn’t a journalist. He is some guy with a phone who is taking his private video and making money using other peoples names and likeness. He needs to get a signed release.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agw123
The Supreme Court has said otherwise. Filming in a public area there is no privacy afforded.
I will never understand why some people don't understand that "there is no expectation of privacy in public".
Don't want to be filmed in a publicly accessible building or performing your job duties in public? Simple, don't hold a government job that is funded by the tax payers dollars.
You do not need permission from anyone to film in public. I'm amazed that there are people who still think you need a "signed release".
He literally did that to the commissioners wife at her private home who is NOT a public servant. So just stop with the defending of this felon attention monger.
Not true. Did you watch the video? She was on camera for a whopping 23 seconds and he blocked out her whoe upper body on his youtube post. She knows he cheats on her, but this time it controversial because of who it's with, the former county executive of NassauCounty.
Not true. Did you watch the video? She was on camera for a whopping 23 seconds and he blocked out her whoe upper body on his youtube post. She knows he cheats on her, but this time it controversial because of who it's with, the former county executive of NassauCounty.
Yes I did. So what he still ambushed her at her private residence and accused her husband of having an affair with ZERO proof, other than (he has "sources" LMAO). Complete scum.
I will never understand why some people don't understand that "there is no expectation of privacy in public".
Don't want to be filmed in a publicly accessible building or performing your job duties in public? Simple, don't hold a government job that is funded by the tax payers dollars.
You do not need permission from anyone to film in public. I'm amazed that there are people who still think you need a "signed release".
Because people fail to understand their rights....
You do not need permission from anyone to film in public. I'm amazed that there are people who still think you need a "signed release".
No, you don't need a release to film someone (or anything) in public.
Film all you like in public. Just be careful how you use that footage. Many usages do require a release. People still own "rights" to the use of their own likeness. You cannot use that footage for any purpose you desire.
Every movie, TV show, or other legitimate commercial endeavor obtains a release and compensates "background" actors who are "recognizable" in the shot (even if they are regular people who just happen to be in the scene). There is a reason for that.
When you purchase "stock" photography/video there are two different releases needed to publish that image. One from the photographer who "owns" the image and a second from the model who "owns" their likeness. You can look at the image all day long, but you better be careful what you do with it if you don't have BOTH releases. I've been doing this a long time and have had more than my share of calls from lawyers asking about releases on file (and that's for "editorial" use images).
True "news" does not usually need a model release. The question is where on the legal spectrum this activity falls. That's for a court to decide.
I would bet there is also a potential question of harassment. Film the cop who pulled you over? Makes sense. Walk into a random public building for no other reason than to stand there and take a video of some pencil pusher sitting at a desk? As some point that could go beyond annoying.
As I've said before, it will be interesting to see how this plays out in court. Unfortunately for all of us, the decisions may not set the precedent we like.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
