More Performers Are Demanding Audiences Lock Up Their Phones (nytimes.com) 552
More performers -- and other venues -- are discovering a new anti-piracy technology called Yondr -- including comedian Dave Chappelle. Slashdot reader HughPickens.com quotes the New York Times:
Fans are required to place their cellphones into Yondr's form-fitting lockable pouch when entering the show, and a disk mechanism unlocks it on the way out. Fans keep the pouch with them, but it is impossible to snap pictures, shoot videos or send text messages during the performance while the pouch is locked.
'I know my show is protected, and it empowers me to be more honest and open with the audience,' says Dave Chappelle...But some fans object to not being able to disseminate and see live shows via videotape...
"In this day and age, my phone is how I keep my memory," one live-music fan told the Washington Post, adding "If you don't want your music heard, then don't perform it." But the device is becoming more common, and according to the Times it's now also being used at weddings, restaurants, schools, and when movies are being prescreened.
'I know my show is protected, and it empowers me to be more honest and open with the audience,' says Dave Chappelle...But some fans object to not being able to disseminate and see live shows via videotape...
"In this day and age, my phone is how I keep my memory," one live-music fan told the Washington Post, adding "If you don't want your music heard, then don't perform it." But the device is becoming more common, and according to the Times it's now also being used at weddings, restaurants, schools, and when movies are being prescreened.
what about security? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:what about security? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you are on call 24/7, you really need to re-evaluate your life choices...
Re:what about security? (Score:4, Interesting)
That depends entirely upon how much you're being paid to be on call 24/7. To use an old expression, "every man has his price," and if you're being paid enough to feasibly retire in a short timespan on the earnings, it sort of changes the economics of the matter. -PCP
Re:what about security? (Score:5, Interesting)
That depends entirely upon how much you're being paid to be on call 24/7. To use an old expression, "every man has his price," and if you're being paid enough to feasibly retire in a short timespan on the earnings, it sort of changes the economics of the matter. -PCP
Bingo. I wouldn't do a 24/7 on-call job again, but I did that once in IT. Those were 5 grueling years, but they paid well and served me well. They also got me (temporarily) out of being a developer and to see all the other important shit that goes around development.
I became a much better developer because of it. Now with children, I wouldn't do it... unless I have a need for a job or if the pay is so spectacular that I could sacrifice 3-4 years plowing at it to create a greater safety net with which to provide (and protect) my family.
The previous OP, just because a choice was made that doesn't fit the shallow pigeonholes of your world view, that does not rob them of legitimacy. Shut your mouth and learn to walk other people's shoes for a change.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are on call 24/7, you really need to re-evaluate your life choices...
Maybe a person who works as a heart surgeon or trauma specialist has made a specific life choice. Did that person do the wrong choice in becoming a heart surgeon or trauma specialist?
Re: (Score:2)
If your on call all the time you are being taken advantage of.
Re: (Score:3)
Additionally any time a doctor is 'on call' they are on a leash from the hospital. For most specialties they have to be at the hospital in 15 minutes or less.
Unless they live in a small town most 'on call' doctors just stay on campus and do other things. (My wife jokes that the surgeons live in the weight room).
This isn't 1980 where a pager will alert the doctor to be somewhere in an hour.
Re:what about security? (Score:5, Interesting)
If you are on call 24/7, you really need to re-evaluate your life choices...
Why? I made a very nice living by being on call. Nice enough to retire at 55. Now I'm not on call at all.
A lot of the people who thought I was crazy are now re-evaluating their own life choices, because after finally doing the realmath, they "plan" on never retiring - assuming health issues or a forced retirement analogue doesn't get them.
Re:what about security? (Score:5, Insightful)
+1
If you're on call, regardless of your profession, you assume a responsibility.
Don't burden others with the consequences of your choices.
The fix for this problem is easy; don't go to a location where your phone will not work.
If you can't do something that easy, you shouldn't have been trusted with it in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Have doctors really gotten rid of their pagers?
Re:what about security? (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope. Pagers are still quite common for doctors. They have batteries that last weeks at a time, and use frequencies that penetrate buildings much easier.
Re: (Score:2)
and like on-call Doctors who couldn't care less if they're ruining the end of "Star Wars" for you because they have to go and err you know? save-a-life.
That's why vibration mode is for, the very thing that has existed for years and that movie theaters reminds you off at the beginning of every single movie.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Those are called assholes. Being on call does not preclude your ability to put your phone on vibrate.
They're also called idiots. They can use DND mode so that only actually important calls get through while they're in a theater.
Re: (Score:3)
1. Bring a second, crappy phone.
2. Lock the crappy phone in the pouch.
3. PROFIT!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:what about security? (Score:5, Insightful)
Like emergencies. Can the phones be retrieved quickly enough in the "fog of war". Can a police situation be recorded?
Are you one of those people who panic when the little notification on the phone says "No Service"? I know several who have become so worried by the "what if" scenarios that they get all nervous even if it dips out of LTE these days. I do have personal experience in students losing letter grades because they wouldn't put their cellphones in a pouch for a required lecture attendance. Which is all to say that they were more worried about (fill in the blank) than passing a course
This isn't aimed at you specifically, but what I am seeing in society. If it is so important to you as an individual that you never are witout immediate access to that little smartphone, you probably shouldn't go to any shows. Something that 20 years ago didn't exist is now controlling your life, and as likely as not, you don't feel even a little more secure.
That's why I am really concerned about the home surveillance systems offered today. They always show some parent - usually a mother, all pleased and relieved because the surveillance camera shows her children getting home from school, or the pets are safe.
If this follows the smartphone path, mom or dad will be checking more and more often - after all "what if one of the children hurts themselves while I'm not looking, or what if a burglar or rapist breaks into the house at that moment when I'm not watching?" So next thing you know, mom and dad are paranoid as all hell, and watching over their house at all times. Work/vacation/ during sex....
If smartphones are any indicator, this is the future.
Re: (Score:3)
Forest of hands (Score:5, Insightful)
Value for money (Score:5, Interesting)
That is why I do not go to concerts anymore.
That's why? I don't go because the value for money almost always sucks. Once in a while a concert is an awesome experience but most of the time it's just an expensive, overly loud, poorly produced, sloppily performed, rehashing of music I've heard before and better in a recorded format. Sometimes you get the bonus of drunk or stoned concert goers and of course the numerous inconsiderate a-holes or thugs that too often seem to attend. Sure, live music CAN be awesome but it usually isn't. I really don't get the point of concert where i need ear plugs to avoid getting hearing damage.
Maybe all that is your bag and you dig it in spite of the problems. Cool by me. Have fun. Personally I find many/most concerts something to be avoided because the experience is decidedly unpleasant. I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions and I've been to a handful of excellent concerts myself. But most simply aren't worth even a fraction of the price of admission.
Re:Value for money (Score:5, Funny)
I don't go to concerts to hear the lyrics. I go to concerts to knock people over in the pit while the music is played. Can't do that in my living room, it's called domestic violence in that case
Violence (Score:2)
I don't go to concerts to hear the lyrics. I go to concerts to knock people over in the pit while the music is played.
Sounds like you need counseling rather than a concert. If you really need to go hit people I can suggest a few sports like boxing or MMA. You can even play music while you do it.
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds like you need counseling rather than a concert.
Sounds like you're a wimp who wouldn't last five minutes in a pit. That's OK, but don't pretend it makes you superior. It doesn't. It makes you fragile.
Re: (Score:3)
Dude, you're going to the wrong concerts. I've been to around 30 concerts so far this year, and most of them have been absolutely amazing, with bands at the top of their game and lively good-natured crowds. Sure, there have been a couple of weaker shows, but that's how it always is.
Granted, I mostly go to metal and hard rock shows, priced between $10-60, and held at venues with room for no more than ~1000 people. That's the sweet spot for me, and I've been having a blast. Some of the best shows happened wit
Too few good live entertainers (Score:2)
Artists that are exceptional live entertainers do not have to worry about this. No jerky phone recording can do the real thing justice.
Agreed but that describes relatively few performers in my experience. Particularly among the flavor of the day pop acts. Some well known bands are absolutely terrible in person. Some like Rod Stewart are inexplicably popular despite a profound lack of singing ability. The Beach Boys were renowned for using hired hands [esquire.com] in the studio (others did too) and I can confirm with my own eyes and ears that they were not a great live band. Any performer that has to use auto-tune or lip-syncs is a waste of money.
I
Re: (Score:2)
But not nearly as pretty....
Re:Forest of hands (Score:4, Interesting)
Back in my day, we had half-naked women pop-up. Why can't we go back to those simpler times...?
banned now, required later (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
bill the card linked to the ticket + an 1% fee.
Re: (Score:2)
1% - ha! How about $5 plus 15% - it's still less than the cut Ticketmaster takes for the ticket sale.
My phone is how I keep my memory? (Score:4, Insightful)
Use your eyes. And brain.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people don't have very good memories.
Re:My phone is how I keep my memory? (Score:5, Insightful)
Use your eyes. And brain.
I still recall when I spent a significant amount of time in Rome over a decade ago. This was before smartphones were common, but reasonably portable videocameras were pretty cheap.
I remember how many tourists I saw walking down the hallways in the Vatican Museums or whatever with their videocameras plastered on their eyes, bumping into everything, basically oblivious to the world except for their camera and its settings.
In general, most of these folks were completely oblivious to the fact that they were surrounded by priceless art, historical artifacts, etc. And they could probably have bought some "virtual tour" DVD for a few bucks that would give them an even better visual record than their camera.
This tendency has only worsened in the era of the smartphone. To each his own, but I actually sometimes like to simply live my life and experience what's going on around me to the fullest, rather than spend the whole time making what's probably an inferior recording.
I kept an electronic journal of sorts during my visit to Rome, reflecting on my day's activities. Sure, I've forgotten some things, but sometimes I'll go back to those log entries and that will be enough to jog a lot of memories. Personally, I'm really glad I take time to stop and enjoy the actual experience, and I probably have a lot more memories of what I encountered than those who make a video that they likely watch once (if that) and then never again.
Simple explanation (Score:2)
He thinks his act is so poor that if anyone catches a clip of it on line, they will realise there is no point in paying to see the show?
Re: (Score:2)
This is pretty much truth....
Re: (Score:2)
Or someone will upload the video to youtube or bittorent... where others will watch the show and guess what? Fewer ticket sales. If money was not an issue, most of these performers would not mind cameras. But they have to make a living... so no cameras, no piracy.
Oh and live performances are almost always sloppy compared to recorded events meant for mass-consumption, so no one cares about these slip ups.
Bad bands trying to hide a lack of talent (Score:5, Insightful)
Or someone will upload the video to youtube or bittorent... where others will watch the show and guess what? Fewer ticket sales. If money was not an issue, most of these performers would not mind cameras. But they have to make a living... so no cameras, no piracy.
Nonsense argument. The Grateful Dead was a band that allowed recordings of their concerts and it didn't affect attendance one bit as far as anyone can tell. They cultivated a genuine relationship with their fans unlike too many of the overly entitled "artists" we see today. If a crappy cell phone recording of your concert makes people want to go less then you probably weren't selling anything worth attending in the first place. A good concert cannot remotely be replicated by a shaky video taken on an iPad. I think a lot of performers are trying to hide behind this stuff to cover their lack of actual ability and the poor value for money of their concerts.
Re:Bad bands trying to hide a lack of talent (Score:4, Insightful)
Posted similar elsewhere already, but I'll second this. Often high quality recording straight off the sound board. And still available free online today via archive.org. Almost 11000 recordings...
Re: (Score:2)
Or someone will upload the video to youtube or bittorent... where others will watch the show and guess what? Fewer ticket sales.
Why, because they've seen a clip of it at phone quality and thought, wow, this guy isn't funny, glad I didn't waste my money on that shit?
Sorry, but I like it. (Score:5, Informative)
If people really used to just attend urgency calls, devices like this will be not required. For sure, probably doctors will be allowed to keep their devices. In case of fire, there are employees in the place able to make a call. Like in the old days.
Re: (Score:2)
Case in point where this would have been great... (Score:5, Interesting)
Went to a Rob Zombie show rather recently. He was not happy with the sea of phones and asked several times for people to put them away before finally just saying, "You know guys, you all ask why it seems rock seems like it is dead. It's because of stuff like this. I'm a rocker, not a tv guy. I don't know what to do when all I see staring me in the face is a bunch of cameras. I can't do anything with that." Thankfully people finally got the damned hint and he went on with the show instead of leaving (and yes, it was fscking great - he even went through an entire White Zombie album on top of his solo stuff).
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Why would he care at that point? He got his money. They're the immature brats who think they're entitled to his performance.
If your life revolves around your phone, you need to reevaluate your life.
Re:Case in point where this would have been great. (Score:5, Insightful)
Been better if the audience just said a collective "Fuck you" and walked out...
I'll now ask you to kindly elaborate as to exactly how your recommendation would have helped anyone.
You can try and make a point about being an "adult" and "choices" and all the usual BS excuses, but nothing you will bring forth can excuse the stupidity of paying a LOT of money to see a live performer in order to disrespect and ignore the piss out of them and their performance all evening with a cell phone in your face or theirs.
Stand-up is a special case (Score:5, Interesting)
I was recently at the Louis C. K. show here in Helsinki and they did not require anyone to lock away their phones, but prior to the show there was an announcement that anyone caught filming the show will be ejected.
As a lover of stand-up, I can understand why they're strict about this: the tickets to the show cost nearly 60 euros and essentially people are paying that to hear new material. It's different from music and other performing arts where most often people know what they're going to see. AC/DC won't lose any ticket sales if a few dozen guys upload a shitty quality video of Thunderstruck from midfield. But a recording - even audio only - of the new material by a stand up performer will probably hurt ticket sales.
That being said this seems like overreach: I did not see anyone being ejected from the aforementioned show (well, outside 1 dude who was way too drunk but he wasn't recording). People who've invested money to get to the show are unlikely to risk missing the show just to get a clip online, so I don't see a need for such a high-tech solution.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just about the video clips, but about the disturbance to the rest of the audience of having a phone screen suddenly light up in their line of vision.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just about the video clips, but about the disturbance to the rest of the audience of having a phone screen suddenly light up in their line of vision.
I've been just waiting for this to happen, but it never does. I guess I need to go out more for that. Early to bed, early to rise, means never having someone else's cellphone shine in your eyes.
Re: (Score:2)
Hope you enjoy being broke (Score:3)
Not wasting a cent on any performer who engages in this nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure you'll be missed. (snicker)
Re:Hope you enjoy being broke (Score:5, Insightful)
Not wasting a cent on any performer who engages in this nonsense.
Good. You stick to your guns and never go to another live show again.
I'm sick of people like you trying to film shows and blocking my view. Instead of me being able to enjoy a show, I have the experience stolen from me so while some narcissistic tool holds their iPad above their head to take shakycam footage with abysmal audio, and all I can see is their poorly exposed image on the iPad's screen.
It's a LIVE performance. The entire point of the exercise is what's happening right in front of you at that very second. Whatever you're recording on your phone or iPad is a miserable substitute. Try actually paying attention to the show instead of fiddling with your widget.
Re:Hope you enjoy being broke (Score:5, Interesting)
I beg to differ.
I completely agree with you that it is a live experience that should be experienced live.
But it's a difference between a 20 seconds clip to try to make your friends green with envy (if that's possible with the crappy quality) or to serve as a souvenir (only needs to be barely recognizable for that) or trying to make the worst replacement of a professional DVD production.
Best solution I've seen was a singer-songwriter. At the beginning he asked the audience to put phones away until the encore, during which the stage (and house) lighting would be set in a way that would allow for at least somewhat acceptable picture quality. Result: Audience (and artist) got an undisturbed show AND souvenir material.
Prohibit in advance or not at all (Score:2)
I'm sick of people like you trying to film shows and blocking my view. Instead of me being able to enjoy a show, I have the experience stolen from me so while some narcissistic tool holds their iPad above their head to take shakycam footage with abysmal audio, and all I can see is their poorly exposed image on the iPad's screen.
Curious argument. You want to enjoy the performance on your terms while denying others the right to do the same. The idiot holding the smartphone could make exactly the same argument in reverse and it would be equally valid. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that trying to record a concert with an iPad is an idiotic thing to do and can definitely reduce the enjoyment for others. But if the folks producing the concert don't prohibit that behavior it's kind of hard to argue that they are ruining the ex
Re: (Score:3)
Not wasting a cent on any performer who engages in this nonsense.
Good. You stick to your guns and never go to another live show again.
I'm sick of people like you trying to film shows and blocking my view. Instead of me being able to enjoy a show, I have the experience stolen from me so while some narcissistic tool holds their iPad above their head to take shakycam footage with abysmal audio, and all I can see is their poorly exposed image on the iPad's screen.
It's a LIVE performance. The entire point of the exercise is what's happening right in front of you at that very second. Whatever you're recording on your phone or iPad is a miserable substitute. Try actually paying attention to the show instead of fiddling with your widget.
Personally I have never recorded at a live event with a phone. The only time I have done any recordings was at a race track with a handheld camera and the official camera man traded me tickets for any good clips I got. If an event wants to prevent me from using my phone in any manner, including everything that does not involve recording, because of what other people do, they don't need my business. I probably wont be missed but I wont miss anything that important either.
Re: (Score:2)
What an entitled baby you are. Performers don't want people like you at their concerts anyway.
They do want you to pay for the tickets though, and buy the dvd because apparently being funny only works once.
Great! Now do this... (Score:5, Funny)
2) put inside a Samsung Galaxy 7
3)
4) Profit!
As a D-list performer... (Score:3, Insightful)
I guess if you're selling out every show and can't find a bigger venue in town then you can get away with this.
As a D-list performer? Please, tag yourself at my show, throw a couple pics up on social media, drop a clip on youtube. Selfies at the merch table after our set.
Tomorrow night we're in Sheboygan, tell your friends there how awesome tonight was...
This guy is NOT a live music fan (Score:5, Insightful)
"In this day and age, my phone is how I keep my memory," one live-music fan told the Washington Post, adding "If you don't want your music heard, then don't perform it."
If you don't want to see the artist's performance enough to abide by their wishes and see it live rather than filtered through your smart phone, then stay home. Those of us attending the concert will be quite happy not to put up with the jostling, distracting light from your device's display, and the general assholery of a self-entitled little prick who believes he has some kind of divine right to be accommodated.
Give Out an Official Recording (Score:2)
In this day and age, with cheap cameras and practically free storage, performers should record everything, and they should give out the recordings to their audiences. Every joke Dave Chappelle ever makes is going to be on YouTube, their is nothing he can do about that. If he is unwilling for the public to hear something he says, then he probably should not say it in front of an audience of several hundred.
Re:Give Out an Official Recording (Score:5, Informative)
This day and age? Hell, the Grateful Dead did it for DECADES ... and yet, they always seemed to sell tickets to the next show.
Why, you can even go and download high bitrate MP3s of shows, often recorded directly from the sound board. Here ya go - only 11000 recordings... https://archive.org/details/Gr... [archive.org]
Re: (Score:2)
In this day and age, with cheap cameras and practically free storage, performers should record everything, and they should give out the recordings to their audiences. Every joke Dave Chappelle ever makes is going to be on YouTube, their is nothing he can do about that. If he is unwilling for the public to hear something he says, then he probably should not say it in front of an audience of several hundred.
You watch an entertainer. You listen to a comedian.
BIG difference between the two when it comes to profitability after new material has been leaked.
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This is why we can't have nice things (Score:5, Informative)
It goes in a neoprene pouch which you then hold on to, you don't part with anything.
Easy way to deal with this. (Score:2)
Vote "No" by avoiding venues that use this stuff.
Just don't. (Score:5, Insightful)
Such entitlement... (Score:2)
..."If you don't want your music heard, then don't perform it."...
The performer does want the music heard, the performer does not want the music recorded. See the difference?
.
The solution to this is simple. If you are unable or unwilling to enjoy the performance under the guidelines set by the performer, then do not go to the performance.
See how simple that is.
Ah, memories. (Score:2)
"In this day and age, my phone is how I keep my memory,"
Really? I know people say this shit, but do they REALLY mean it? I'm a tech guy, I love my smart phone, and my cloud storage, and everything else as much as the next guy. I have been "guilty" of snapping a picture at a concert, but that's not how I remember the concert. Do people actually go through their phones to reminisce and re-watch the inaudible, grainy, shitty video they shot from 50 rows back at the Katy Perry concert? Need a memory, take your picture, then put your god damn phone down. There a
Sigh (Score:3, Insightful)
Just another performer that I wouldn't go and see live then.
Sorry, but recording devices are not new.
Interruptions from the audience are not new.
Why we feel the need to act on them now that copyright law is VASTLY in favour of the artists, whereas before it wasn't, I can't fathom. But that also seems to be the trigger for this kind of reaction.
If you want me to effectively cripple my phone, something that stays with me all the time EVEN THOUGH I WORK IN SCHOOLS, then we're going to clash heads. I either won't come and see you perform, or I have to jump through a specific, special, nuisance every time I want to do so. Like a form of DRM on a live performance. That will affect my enjoyment, and the rate I'd be willing to pay for that performance.
There's a time and a place for smartphones. I happily agree with you throwing out ANYONE whose phone goes off at a classical concert, for instance. No problem at all. Their own fault for failing to manage their device when they were given the opportunity to voluntarily manage their device.
Even chicken-wire cages around the venue, or whatever. Fine. But to demand I start putting useful items in little bags, you're just trying to be like the TSA and other places who are overstepping their remit under the name of something else (terrorism, etc.). And do you demand the same of, say, a smartwatch?
I can get a mobile phone with camera and wireless and bluetooth that's the size and thickness of a credit card. Literally, now, on Amazon, for 30 GBP. You can't police that kind of thing. And you're at a large venue with people who've paid to see you and you object to them immortalising that special performance?
Wholesale copyright infringement is an entirely different problem. Taking people's phones away doesn't solve that either.
But the problem of "how can I convince an audience that they want to pay money to come and see me?" That's a difficult enough prospect as it is without adding obstacles for yourself.
If I ever did want to go to such a thing, and there was a warning on booking that this was required, I'd cancel. If I turned up and this was an ad-hoc policy, not notified and only implemented on the door? We're going to have an argument and I'm going to seek a refund for more than just my ticket and time wasted.
Blame yourselves (Score:2, Insightful)
Video tape? (Score:2)
So they copy the shows from their phones over to video tape?
How interesting...
I wonder who will go broke first... (Score:3)
So when I arrive an hour early to make sure that I'm not late because of traffic or the crowds, I can't pass the time until the event starts by playing games on my phone.
And parents can't check up on their kids by sending texts.
No, thanks.
Most already charge too much money for an evening's entertainment. If the price of admission didn't keep you away, then the price of food/snacks/drinks might. Now, if the total cost doesn't keep you away, this silly rule might. In my case, it definitely will.
Weddings? (Score:3)
I get to a wedding, and the Bride/groom asks me to do this, I'll turn around, head home, and take my gift with me
Enjoy your wedding
Re: (Score:3)
Won't save a dime, as this is usually sprung on you, so they have already paid for the meal, and frankly, they folks my age are already married, so it would be their kids, and guess what, Fuck'm. If they are going to disrespect me enough to do this, I don't WANT to ever talk to them again
Re:Interesting, Dave Chappelle. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm guessing the man would be all for tying a body camera to every police officer on earth, but god help you if you point a camera at HIM. Do that and you'll have to put it in a DRM-enabled "satchel" and pay a few hundred bucks for a ticket to see his drugged out ass.
Maybe someone should mention to Chappelle that he hasn't been relevant since he literally clicked his heels three times and went back to Africa.
That's one Olympic-level strawman you've built there - probably gold-medal caliber!
Are you too dumb to see the difference between police officers - agents of the GOVERNMENT who we HAVE to deal with - being required to videotape their interactions with citizens and a PRIVATE performer that you only get to see on HIS TERMS and who NO ONE IS FORCING YOU TO SEE?
Or maybe you just trust that those government agents known as "police" will always do the right thing?
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, your local peace officers do the right thing. That's their job and there is a multitude of tools, trainings, and stats to back it up.
OTOH, them wearing body cams is a great way to show the world just how much of an stupid asshole YOU are. I think those should automatically be uploaded to youtube and found by a simple google search by your future employers, possible friends, love interests, family, etc etc. It'll also tie the hands of a peace officer in not being able to let you go with a warning - s
Re:Interesting, Dave Chappelle. (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe you just don't understand the similarities in your haste to point out the differences.
The only similarity is that video recording take place. The context in which these two occur are so vastly different that the similarities are irrelevant.
Re: (Score:3)
Performer in a private venue is not public.
I don't break the fucking law
I bet you do every single day.
Re: Interesting, Dave Chappelle. (Score:3)
No, but a performer has no expectation of privacy, which is typically the rule of thumb used when determining if recording is permitted.
Re: Interesting, Dave Chappelle. (Score:4, Informative)
Exactly why do you think a performer, in a private venue, has no expectation of privacy? That can be totally determined by the venue owner. Who may or may not have an agreement with the performer on what is or is not allowed.
Re:Interesting, Dave Chappelle. (Score:4, Informative)
Venue owners can ban anyone not in a federally protected class of people.
So, smokers yes, races no.
Re: (Score:3)
So when you're driving home and there is a DUI checkpoint ahead, how do you not deal with the police?
I had this exact situation a few weeks back - on my way home with my girlfriend in the car, police had a checkpoint set up. The office claimed he could smell alcohol on my breath (total fucking horseshit) and performed a field sobriety test on me. Unsurprisingly, I passed and continued home, a little salty over the affair.
How would you "not deal" with that? Turn around as soon as you see the checkpoint, a
Re:Interesting, Dave Chappelle. (Score:4, Insightful)
That was quite impressive, you spent the whole time bemoaning celebrities that you failed to point out why you would have the right to film someone against their wishes in a private establishment.
Police should wear a cam because they are individuals in a profession that is going to put them in a situation at some point where we need to know what happens. Not want to know. They are going to be put into a position where they might have to fire their gun or use other physical force. We need to know if that's justified or not. It's a way of watching the watchers. It's a way for the Police to get some vindication when they are falsely accused of doing something wrong. There's so much benefit to it as a public servant that it makes sense. We don't require them to wear it home.
Performers are being a bit ridiculous in not wanting to be recorded, but I do kind of understand it. They don't want to be distracted with flashes during a performance, they don't want their material leaked and stolen online, they don't wan't a joke taken seriously that was highly inappropriate. They know it's inappropriate but a good comedian might tell it anyway to emphasize a point, shock people. They don't want it taken out of context.
You only want to record them. Take a step back and think about it for a second. Do you have to allow me into your house with a video camera and record everything you do? Maybe, but you sure don't have to let me. You don't even have to let a police officer into your home with a camera, they would need a warrant. So why you as a public citizen who rented a space can't deny people from entering your rented venue can't deny it.
Now you go and learn how to properly debate instead of skirting an issue and changing the subject.
Re:Interesting, Dave Chappelle. (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't like it? Vote with your wallet. Don't attend concerts / shows that require you to lock up your phone. You won't be missed by anybody.
Re: (Score:3)
... except the performer.
Seems rather shortsighted to be blocking all that free publicity.
Stealing a joke? Really? If they are so concerned, that's what copyright is for... otherwise, they are just another lame entitled person with no real skills relying on secrecy to dupe people into spending money to see their lame show.
Re: (Score:3)
So, no point to be made. Good discussion.
Re:Interesting, Dave Chappelle. (Score:5, Interesting)
One great benefit of the smartphone era is that we can easily find out when two-faced, dissembling politicians attempt to say things in private lectures that conflict with their publicly stated policy positions.
So let's imagine a typical fundraising dinner in Dave Chappelle's dystopian future. A keynote speech will be given by a prominent politician, and a comedian will lighten the mood with a short gig between dessert and the auction. The comedian insists that his intellectual property is protected by Yondr, so the politician is free to promise unpublicised tax-breaks for his loyal supporters, to make racially insensitive remarks or to heap insults on some random basket of deplorables with no threat of being exposed during his next election campaign.
I can imagine a world where no self-respecting politician will give a speech without the comfort of an accompanying comedian who conveniently insists on 'protection'. This is not good for democracy.
Re: (Score:2)
to make racially insensitive remarks or to heap insults on some random basket of deplorables with no threat of being exposed during his next election campaign.
You comment as if such things would adversely affect a politician's election campaign. That doesn't seem to always be the case.
Re: (Score:2)
to make racially insensitive remarks or to heap insults on some random basket of deplorables with no threat of being exposed during his next election campaign.
You comment as if such things would adversely affect a politician's election campaign. That doesn't seem to always be the case.
I'm not in the US, but my understanding from afar is that Hillary's 'deplorables' gaffe was accompanied by a measurable swing toward Trump. Then Trump's own gaffes come to prominence...
In the UK, several Labour politicians have been embarrassed by phone footage of speeches given to groups of far left activists. For example, the shadow chancellor was recently revealed as celebrating the Great Recession in 2008 as something that he had been waiting years for in his fight to overthrow capitalism. And phone foo
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not in the US, but my understanding from afar is that Hillary's 'deplorables' gaffe was accompanied by a measurable swing toward Trump.
Hard to say. Pick a poll, and pick an answer, pprobably based on what the answerer wants. Iv'e seen people call it her 47% moment - recalling Mitt Romney in the previous election, and others saying it didn't hurt her at all.
And phone footage of Momentum meetings has shown activists scheming to have moderate politicians deselected (essentially removed from office for those not familiar with UK politics). There has definitely been a backlash in the polls against these revelations.
So, yes, election campaigns can definitely be affected by mobile phone footage.
IIRC, that was how the 47% Romney chitchat was obtained.
And for all of the brouhaha over the DNC leaks that show favoring Clinton over Sanders, odd how people forget the old Permanent Republican majority movement, where Republicans targeted other Republicans who were deemed "too moder
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Trump's PussyLeaks comments helped him with blacks. [youtu.be] Apparently the only men in America who will still admit to liking pussy.
Re: (Score:3)
So, in other words, it would be just like the previous 225 years of the existence of the United States of America.
How did Abraham "Honest Abe" Lincoln ever get elected (twice) without smartphones to keep him honest!?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't have a cell phone.
Then be ready for them to refuse entry. Even the homeless have phones now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your phone is never in their possession. It's always in your possession, but in a locked bag. (taht will be unlocked remotely after the show)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, Hitler really hated all those cell phones recording his speeches prior to starting World War II.
Re: (Score:3)