Gear is not consent, and nudity is not consent... but being in a public place filled with people? That’s (implied) consent. "I believe I should be able to do what I want in public and not be photographed doing it" sounds like something racist rally marchers would say. https://twitter.com/PhotoAttorney/status/1024173465996148738 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @JASutherlandBks
There are multiple lines, both legal and moral. But "I’m doing something in public in front of thousands of people which might embarrass me if somebody puts it on Twitter" is not close to any of them.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @legalinspire @JASutherlandBks
To a first approximation, every adult in San Francisco carries a high-quality video recording device with them at all times. Thinking that you can go to a huge public event and reasonably expect not to be recorded is massive entitlement bordering on magical thinking.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @legalinspire @JASutherlandBks
And equating photography to assault is petulant nonsense, the kind of thing people make fun of authoritarian assholes for in other contexts.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @legalinspire @JASutherlandBks
I understand that the law is what it is. I also think that the current law, where my leaving the house to buy a gallon of milk means that I can be recorded from the second I step foot off my land until I return and the video uploaded is...not what I or others want.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
And let me head off at the pass the argument that assumes everyone is neuro-typical: "oh, it's not that big of a deal" Bain voice: FOR YOU Some people (like me) are spergs. I actively flinch from being looked at Some people are actually autistic and have an even worse response
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.