Nah, he was commenting on my edit of a typo.

Sure, im aware of how the general public assumes it works (i watch alot of 1a audit videos). But its one thing to be misinformed, its another to speak with authority at length, purely based on your gut feeling.

Honestly the level of confidence and intelligent seeming approach that other guy had, while talking completely out of his ass, is unsettling.

NO, you can only film if you’ve printed out or written on a piece of paper “PRESS”. This makes you super duper legit and only then are you granted 1st amendment rights. If you don’t have a printer or at least paper and pen, then you’re shit out of luck!

This is because people need to be able to hide from cameras - this is also why it is ILLEGAL to film someone if they don’t know about it. Why do you think there’s bouncers at every business who make you sign a release form to enter any building? Why do you think people are forced to blur out bystanders when they take pictures at Disney? Why do you think that its ILLEGAL to film celebrities on the street? Check. Mate.

You couldn’t be more wrong. You’re conflating commercial image rights, public interest reporting, and actual privacy rights. You can be filmed in public all day legally; you just might not be able to sell your image commercially without a release. Public visibility doesn’t give you privacy - that’s why cops, traffic cams, and news footage can film you legally. Filmmakers needing consent is about commercial exploitation of someone’s image, not a magic ‘right to not be seen.’ And just because some uses are gross doesn’t suddenly create a legal privacy right. Public exposure ≠ privacy. Period. Oh, and fucking idiot = you.

lol, what does that even mean, you fucking clown

jesus christ your ego can’t let you admit you’re wrong. What a fucking clown you are lol. No you do not “have a right to privacy in public” and thats a stupid thing to say, and you are stupid for dying on this hill. What a fucking loser

You should try reading that article yourself, which is about aggregated, long-term tracking (like GPS data or ALPR networks) and persistent surveillance over time, which is very different from the moment-to-moment visibility you have on a train.

Damn dude, you look really fucking stupid here, do you want to try again?

This happened in New York and i doubt even places where its illegal to film you can just assault someone and destroy their property.

Clearly she did know she was being filmed but thats besides the points. 1: you’re nearly always being filmed in public.

My point is you’re not being spied on if you’re in public. Grown ass adult crying “stop looking at me!!!”

ok, this isn’t a private setting though. If she had attacked him for filming her in private i’d %1000 support her. I dont support ppl being violent because they feel like it.

Then advocate for changing the law. Its childish to think you get to just assault people and destroy their shit because they’ve made you uncomfortable

Its not a joke your mom is pissed and taking it out on me. Come the fuck upstairs and get your tendies.

You dont get to assault people and destroy property for being rude though is the point. Not holding the door for someone is rude but you can’t then punch them for it, legally.

Dumb fuck, you dont have a “right” to privacy in public. Also i never said that you fucking moron. Have fun fighting imaginary arguments in an empty room.

Lol. Bro come upstairs. Your tendies are getting cold

What if something entirely different happened though? Then the violence would be justified. Check and mate

There’s no privacy in public. End of story. There’s no privacy to respect in a public space.

Why does secretly matter? Unless they’re peeping under a skirt. It’s not “spying” - you’re in public.

“he shouldn’t have been videoing you” why? I can see the argument that it’s socially rude, but its absolutely legal in public.

People’s notion that they can’t be filmed genuinely feels like children screaming “stop looking at me!!!”