Thread: Way to make your point, Bro.

Originally Posted by -Lazarus-

The difference is that paparazzi stick to public areas. This guy did not. For example, he walked around what appears to be a university building and just barged into rooms with a camera. That's trespassing, for example. Also, if you are getting in someone's space, videotaping them, and violating their privacy, humiliating them, then you post it online, I believe there are federal cyber bullying laws that may apply.

This guy had better be careful because someone with enough time and money could easily ruin his life in civil and criminal court. All it will take is him getting in the wrong person's face.

Not that i agree with his methods but you are wrong. A university is public space as far as the law goes. Public space has very few laws regarding video taping anything. So when you leave your home your really only safe in a few spaces. Such as doctors offices and bathrooms.

They could take him to court but legally he hasn't broken any laws by video taping people in public arenas. Cyber bullying would definitely be subject to the judges opinion.

Originally Posted by -Lazarus-

The difference is that paparazzi stick to public areas. This guy did not. For example, he walked around what appears to be a university building and just barged into rooms with a camera. That's trespassing, for example. Also, if you are getting in someone's space, videotaping them, and violating their privacy, humiliating them, then you post it online, I believe there are federal cyber bullying laws that may apply.

This guy had better be careful because someone with enough time and money could easily ruin his life in civil and criminal court. All it will take is him getting in the wrong person's face.

No they don't. How many paparrazi pics have you seen of couples sitting on their balcony with a lady's top off? Or in their swimming pool?

And I looked at all those vids, and I can't think of that many instances where he was not in a public place. I do however think video taping a bank, or airport should bring some measure of the law against you. But his legal argument would be ironclad. Which would be, "If there are security cameras in every place I was, with people behind them watching you, then how is standing right behind the camera a criminal offense?"

Its annoying. Its an asshole thing to do. But it's what paparazzi get paid to do. They set the precedent. They get paid for it. It's a job. Winning a lawsuit against this guy, would set back that whole "industry" opening them up for lawsuit after lawsuit, all of which would be upheld because of this one case. So no, unless the guy was putting people in danger, I doubt he would be fined or arrested for anything.

being ´legal´ doesn´t make it right. Paparazzi´s put people in danger lots of times. People get in all kinds of accidents trying to get away from these assholes chasing them. These fuckin leeches CHASE people for a living, invade their personal space and privacy. Sure, there´s the argument that celebrities need them as much as they need celebrities ( not AS much but you get the point. They wouldn´t be as famous as they get if their pictures weren´t plastered all over the place). But I still find that profession (paparazzo) disgusting when they don´t respect people not wanting to have their picture taken.

This guy just goes over the line. Sitting at the table of a man having a private conversation on his cell is just fucking ridiculous. It´s disrespectful. People shouldn´t be allowed to pull shit like this, just ´because they can´.

disturbing the peace or something doesn´t apply to this situation? Annoying people for shits and giggles should be punishable by death.

Originally Posted by Xavsnipe

disturbing the peace or something doesn´t apply to this situation? Annoying people for shits and giggles should be punishable by death.

I'm pretty sure that's not what he's doing. This isn't a Paparazzi-thing.


Æ

I know it´s not. He´s still annoying the fuck out of everyone in his videos.

Yea we get the bigger picture of BB surveilling us and ´why are you annoyed if you get recorded everyday by security cameras?´.

The guy is clearly trespassing, disturbing the peace when teachers are trying to teach and this guy walks in the classroom and refuses to leave.

All he needs is 20 seconds to annoy the fuck out of someone. The rest of the time sitting at someone else´s table is just disrespectful and annoying does nothing to support his little point. If after proving his point (15-20 seconds) he explained why he´s doing it and what he wants to be changed then I´d have no problem with the guy. But all I see here, with these recordings and his little smart ass answers is he´s just trying to annoy people and provoke them.

I'm not saying he's right. I'm not saying he's a good guy. All I'm saying is there are people out there who get paid lots of money to do the same thing, and the only difference is, their subjects are famous. This guy is NO different than paparazzi. Which, you're right, is a shitty profession.

If "fame" is the deciding factor in what should be legal vs. illegal, then its no wonder OJ got away with it.

Originally Posted by Xavsnipe

He´s still annoying the fuck out of everyone in his videos.

Oh, totally agree.

I can't tell whether that's specifically the point, or an unfortunate side effect.

So maybe he's trying to prompt social awareness of an issue that's sneaking past most of us, and deserves credit for being a conscientious citizen.

Or maybe he's just some punk-ass douche who is completely motivated by a philosophy of "because fuck you, that's why." In which case he doesn't deserve credit, but he's still providing the service.

Cheers,


AetheLove