• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

How legal is this?

B

bluestrobe

Platinum Member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kpjn2eexE38

Long story short, this guy has an agenda to prove his firearm rights. He also likes attention so he posted this video on another forum and got flamed for it. I am mainly wondering if it was lawful to tape it as he did. He refuses to edit the faces and names out saying he had the right to keep them there since it was in a public place. For the record I am not him or his friend. Thoughts?
 
Originally posted by: rasczak
so the inside of the business is public? I was of the understanding that it was private property?
Click to expand...

It is, which is why the owner could have kicked him out.

You are legally allowed to record/photograph in public places and do not have to edit faces out. The only way he would be in violation of the law would be if he refused to leave the building when told he had to leave.
 
Originally posted by: rasczak
so the inside of the business is public? I was of the understanding that it was private property?
Click to expand...

It's a place of business, it's private property but open to the public. So it's a public area.
 
Originally posted by: Insomniator
Legal but its also legal for the owner of the store to kick his ass out...
Click to expand...

Yeah, sounds like his "friend" did a shitty job concealing his weapon. It's called concealed carry for a reason.

What he did was fine, but bringing a camera is fairly annoying.
 
OP you may want to read up on the law regarding photos/videos

An excerpt from there:

You're photographing products at the supermarket.

You need permission to take photos on private property. But stores are private spaces open to the public. Owners can limit photography with clearly posted restrictions.
Click to expand...

So unless there are posted restricitions (which AFAIK HD/Lowes have none), it's legal until asked to stop/leave.
 
I thought I heard something a few years back that if there are less than 100 faces in the video, the persons could technically force the video owner to have their faces to be edited out, even in public.


It may have been someone talking out of their ass though
 
Yea so what's the deal behind this? In some movies and reality shows, I've seen faces blurred out so I assume some kind of consent is required to broadcast peoples faces but at the same time there are lots of other shows that don't do this. When you think about tabloids, the papparazzi takes pics of celebrities all the time and prints them without consent.
 
I won't defend what he did, because it is lame, but not all states require a concealed carry. For example in my state you can open carry (still need the same permit). I have done it before (usually when I want to go to the range) and found it to be more hassle then it was worth (the stares). So depending on the state you do not have to conceal your weapon.

However, I fully support the right of businesses to ask you to leave if you are brandishing a firearm. The store owns that property and it is their right to ask you to leave for any reason (I even support asking someone to leave because they look a certain way or belive a certain thing).

Most of my friends carry, and I do not let them carry at my house when alcohol is present. I am not violating their rights, it is my house, my rules. If they want to drink they are leaving their guns at home or giving them to me to be put in my safe until they leave.
 
In Texas it used to be legal, now a cop can stop you, take your sdcard, review the videos and images and determine if you have been engaged in improper photography, a 3rd degree state jail felony.

You must have everyones permission you video. I think the law is broad and maybe subject to abuse. If you are by yourself and taking pictures, you are likely to be harrased.

edit: The law was originally written because of "upskirt" type websites.

-Texas Law

Sec. 21.15. IMPROPER PHOTOGRAPHY OR VISUAL RECORDING. (a) In this section, "promote" has the meaning assigned by Section 43.21.

(b) A person commits an offense if the person:

(1) photographs or by videotape or other electronic means records, broadcasts, or transmits a visual image of another at a location that is not a bathroom or private dressing room:

(A) without the other person's consent; and

(B) with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;

(2) photographs or by videotape or other electronic means records, broadcasts, or transmits a visual image of another at a location that is a bathroom or private dressing room:

(A) without the other person's consent; and

(B) with intent to:

(i) invade the privacy of the other person; or

(ii) arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person; or

(3) knowing the character and content of the photograph, recording, broadcast, or transmission, promotes a photograph, recording, broadcast, or transmission described by Subdivision (1) or (2).

(c) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.

(d) If conduct that constitutes an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under any other law, the actor may be prosecuted under this section or the other law.

(e) For purposes of Subsection (b)(2), a sign or signs posted indicating that the person is being photographed or that a visual image of the person is being recorded, broadcast, or transmitted is not sufficient to establish the person's consent under that subdivision.
 
Originally posted by: sourceninja
I won't defend what he did, because it is lame, but not all states require a concealed carry. For example in my state you can open carry (still need the same permit). I have done it before (usually when I want to go to the range) and found it to be more hassle then it was worth (the stares). So depending on the state you do not have to conceal your weapon.

However, I fully support the right of businesses to ask you to leave if you are brandishing a firearm. The store owns that property and it is their right to ask you to leave for any reason (I even support asking someone to leave because they look a certain way or belive a certain thing).

Most of my friends carry, and I do not let them carry at my house when alcohol is present. I am not violating their rights, it is my house, my rules. If they want to drink they are leaving their guns at home or giving them to me to be put in my safe until they leave.
Click to expand...

A reason could include video/photos of store/employees/products

:thumbsup: to you for being a responsible gun owner, especially with alcohol.
 
Celeb's and public officials are pretty much immune from public pictures or liable. That is why Jay Leno can criticize the president or the Gov everynight on TV. He can't do that with Mr. John Doe a private citizen. Once you are a public figure, you lose certain rights and can be photographed and spoken about any which way. The reason why some faces in reality shows are blurred out is because they can be recongnized. Obviously, state law varies on this in each state, but this is pretty much the law of the land.

To go into Home Depot to start photographing people, could easily bring about a lawsuit from either Home Depot or any of the people photographed. There is a thing called a 'release' which allows a person to be photographed. Without a release, the photographer opens himself up to a lawsuit. If you have ever watched the TV show Jackass, you will always see peoples faces blurred out. The only ones not blurred out are people they have obtained a release from. (None of the above was meant to be legal advice).
 
There may be some variance depending on the state in which this occurred, but generally speaking, it is 100% legal unless asked to leave the store. At that point, if he refuses to leave, he can be charged with trespassing.

As for open carry, I assume he is in a state where it is legal (which, by the way, is the majority or states).
 
Pretty sure he has to get releases to show people's face. Even if you are standing on the sidewalk, if a photographer wants to take your picture, he has to ask for a release.
 
Originally posted by: sdifox
Pretty sure he has to get releases to show people's face. Even if you are standing on the sidewalk, if a photographer wants to take your picture, he has to ask for a release.
Click to expand...

The safe route is to always get releases, but in public places you are allowed to take pictures of people.

Decent PDF about it here
General guidelines to it, but not from a lawyer and just a persons research
State by state laws guide regarding photography
Missouri Bar Assoc Journalist Right of Privacy Primer
USA Today article about it (two of the links I got from this article)

Anytime there is NOT a reasonable expectation of privacy (i.e. public place) you are generally safe. Anything that is able to be seen from a public spot is legal to record/photograph AS LONG AS there is no expectation of privacy and you don't use any special means to obtain it (like a telephoto lens).

*This is meant as a FYI and I do not offer any kind of legal advice from this post*
 
Not to hijack this thread but we had a similar situation last year that we didn't think was right.

Our church has a Vacation Bible School thing that they do every year in the summer. Bunches of kids go to a place, form teams, do crafts, etc. You have to sign up but it's open to anyone. During the event, people take pictures of the kids and adults doing the various activities.

After it was over, someone made a slide show of lots of the photos that people watched.

The issue is that when people sked if they could get a copy of certain pictures that their kid was in, they were told No because there might be other people in the same picture and they'd have to get release forms from everyone in the pictures and things like that.

We all thought the person who said that was on crack but it was the pastor's wife so no one pushed the issue. Anyone know how that situation would be considered?
 
Originally posted by: FelixDeKat
In Texas it used to be legal, now a cop can stop you, take your sdcard, review the videos and images and determine if you have been engaged in improper photography, a 3rd degree state jail felony.

You must have everyones permission you video. I think the law is broad and maybe subject to abuse. If you are by yourself and taking pictures, you are likely to be harrased.

edit: The law was originally written because of "upskirt" type websites.

-Texas Law

Sec. 21.15. IMPROPER PHOTOGRAPHY OR VISUAL RECORDING. (a) In this section, "promote" has the meaning assigned by Section 43.21.

(b) A person commits an offense if the person:

(1) photographs or by videotape or other electronic means records, broadcasts, or transmits a visual image of another at a location that is not a bathroom or private dressing room:

(A) without the other person's consent; and

(B) with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;

(2) photographs or by videotape or other electronic means records, broadcasts, or transmits a visual image of another at a location that is a bathroom or private dressing room:

(A) without the other person's consent; and

(B) with intent to:

(i) invade the privacy of the other person; or

(ii) arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person; or

(3) knowing the character and content of the photograph, recording, broadcast, or transmission, promotes a photograph, recording, broadcast, or transmission described by Subdivision (1) or (2).

(c) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.

(d) If conduct that constitutes an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under any other law, the actor may be prosecuted under this section or the other law.

(e) For purposes of Subsection (b)(2), a sign or signs posted indicating that the person is being photographed or that a visual image of the person is being recorded, broadcast, or transmitted is not sufficient to establish the person's consent under that subdivision.
Click to expand...

This law does not lay claim to the underlined statement.
This law only applies if BOTH A and B are true... not A or B.

It does not say you cannot take photo/video without the other person's consent, it says you cannot take photo/video without the other person's consent if it was with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.


I refer you to the Photographers Rights
 
Originally posted by: Kelemvor
Not to hijack this thread but we had a similar situation last year that we didn't think was right.

Our church has a Vacation Bible School thing that they do every year in the summer. Bunches of kids go to a place, form teams, do crafts, etc. You have to sign up but it's open to anyone. During the event, people take pictures of the kids and adults doing the various activities.

After it was over, someone made a slide show of lots of the photos that people watched.

The issue is that when people sked if they could get a copy of certain pictures that their kid was in, they were told No because there might be other people in the same picture and they'd have to get release forms from everyone in the pictures and things like that.

We all thought the person who said that was on crack but it was the pastor's wife so no one pushed the issue. Anyone know how that situation would be considered?
Click to expand...

As long as it's not for-profit it should be fine, but I'm not a lawyer.
 
Can't the owners of those faces file DMCA claims saying that they did not give anyone permission to copy the likeness of their face? 🙂
 
Originally posted by: alchemize
Cliffs for those who can't hit youtube at work?
Click to expand...

OP is asking about the legality of the recording of the video.

The video is a guy is open carrying into Home Depot/Lowes, and a friend is recording it. The guy bitches about something about carrying weapons (I didn't watch it, because OP's question doesn't need the video to be watched to answer), and they don't blur out any of the employees/customers faces. OP is asking if it was legal to record the video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top