KNOW1EDGE, an American, thinks you can film any person in public for anything, cause

[KNOW1EDGE]

Pick a link and educate yourself young padwons:

http://https://www.videomaker.com/ar...ndment-rights/

http://https://lifehacker.com/know-y...public-5912250

http://https://longislandaudit.com/

[KNOW1EDGE]

Arb I’m not gonna make fun of you anymore. To be fair, tons of people, police included, aren’t aware the 1st amendment grants the right to film in public.

If you are genuinely interested in finding out the truth you could google it, or search Sean Paul Reyes and he will prove/explain everything to you.

[ArbitraryWater]

not kidding, not a single link of those work for me.



but ay man,


why are these youtubers whos career/profession is public filmmaking, concerned with telling ppl theyre filming, and in case they dont want it, they always blur their faces?


How come the first amendment slipped by them?


Use your peanut brain.

[ArbitraryWater]

i will say this, all of those websites smell like some sketchy life hack bs.. one literally is named lifehacker

[KNOW1EDGE]

Arb- I want to do this respectfully, because again, many people are unaware the 1st amendment grants the right to film in public, the police often try to enforce it and end up paying out lawsuits. (Again, google Sean Paul Reyes)

Google: 1st amendment Audit

Google: 1st amendment freedom of press record in public

The first amendment protects the freedom of press, which means recording and photographing. Which means in any public space or building, the constitution of the United States gives you permission to record and take photos. You can go into USPS and record. You can go into DMV and record.

I know your brain won’t allow you to even fathom being wrong, and I know you won’t do even a 30 second google search, but the constitution remains valid none the less.

[ArbitraryWater]

this is what i got upon googling the second..

The case of Fields v. City of Philadelphia stated that the First Amendment provides the public a "right to record — photograph, film, or audio record — police officers conducting official police activity in public areas."

youre trying to fail as hard as possibe bru?


do you actuay think you know more about pubic fiming rights than pp that make their iving that way or a TV show?


come off it

[KNOW1EDGE]

My bad- I just realized Arb lives in Germany. This all makes more sense now. Proceed as you were little buddy…

[ArbitraryWater]

Never seen someone this confidently wrong

[KNOW1EDGE]

We live in different countries my friend. In the United States of America:

“Take the case of Simon Glik who was arrested in 2007 by Boston police for recording the arrest of another citizen. Glik was charged, among other violations, with violating the state’s eavesdropping law which prohibited the surreptitious recording of oral conversations. Those charges were dropped and he commenced a federal civil rights lawsuit against the officers and the police department. After a widely heralded decision by the U.S. Court of Appeal for the First Circuit, upholding “the fundamental and virtually self-evident nature of the First Amendment’s protections” of the “right to film government officials or matters of public interest in public space,” the case was recently settled with the City of Boston paying Glik $170,000.“

In America, we can film whatever in we want in public spaces thanks to the 1st amendment. If it’s in public, and I’m a member of the public, and I’m interested in it, I can record it. You aren’t familiar with the US constitution, heck, many Americans aren’t, but reality remains. I’m happy to help get the word out.

[baudkarma]

I'm not sure it's the 1st amendment that's involved, but there absolutely is no guarantee of privacy when an individual is in a public space.

At a Lakers game, the camera zooms in on a face-painted fan. Do they need that fans permission?

You go to your local grocery store. They have surveillance cameras everywhere. Do they need your permission?

You're walking your dog in the park. Across the street from the park is a gas station, and their cameras film you and your dog because of the way they're aligned. Do they need your permission?

A photographer snaps a picture of of some Hollywood starlet in a coked-up daze at a club. The picture gets published on TMZ. Did they get permission?

The answer in all this situations is "no", because they didn't need to.

[KNOW1EDGE]

Arb has never watched a YouTube video before.

OR

He thinks the camera man walks up to the dude who just got beat up and asks him for permission to record him and has him sign.

It’s the 1st amendment, I know it’s convoluted, but it’s what grants us the right to record anything in public we deem of interest to the public.

[MrFonzworth]

Knowledge is right you don't need someone's permission to film them in a public place

[Overdrive]

Arb I’m not gonna make fun of you anymore. To be fair, tons of people, police included, aren’t aware the 1st amendment grants the right to film in public.

If you are genuinely interested in finding out the truth you could google it, or search Sean Paul Reyes and he will prove/explain everything to you.

Knowledge is right you don't need someone's permission to film them in a public place

There's a difference between being allowed to film or to publish.

[KNOW1EDGE]

There's a difference between being allowed to film or to publish.

You are correct, there is a difference between filming and publishing- both are protected under the 1st amendment. It’s called the freedom of press. Did you think we are only allowed to record and interview but not share the footage? -how would news work?

Everyone is “the press” you don’t need a badge or certificate or permission to film in public.

[baudkarma]

Only in special circumstances. Quote from the Wikipedia entry for "Model Release":

"No release is required for publication, as news, of a photo taken of an identifiable person when the person is in a public place. In general, no release is required for publication of a photo taken of an identifiable person when the person is in a public space unless the use is for trade or direct commercial use, which is defined as promoting a product, service, or idea.[1] Publication of a photo of an identifiable person, even if taken when the person is in a public place, that implies endorsement, without a model release signed by that person, can result in civil liability for whoever publishes the photograph.[2]"