First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Post Reply Goprohugs scandal and the 1st amendment
15296 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / houston
Offline
Posted 7/15/13 , edited 7/15/13
this is in general and not conventions because i feel that it affects all of us as a whole and not just con goers.

so recently there was a guy at AX with a gopro strapped to his chest, getting hugs from ladies at AX. and in the past few days it has turned into a giant scandal. this is AX's Statement.

Anime Expo® · 107,559 like this
Yesterday at 12:05am in Los Angeles, CA ·
Dear Friends,

We have recently become aware that, during Anime Expo 2013, an individual not connected with the SPJA created an unauthorized and highly inappropriate hidden camera video and, worse, posted it on YouTube. It has since been removed from display.

Anime Expo, as well as all other SPJA events, are family-friendly and we do not take this action lightly -- sexual harassment of any attendee in any way is unacceptable.

We have opened a case with the Los Angeles Police Department; if you are a victim of this unauthorized video or witnessed the recording, and would also like to make a report, please contact the LAPD Central Division at: 213-485-3294.

Our hearts and prayers go out to all of you, especially those who have been impacted by these disrespectful and violating actions. We will do all we can to assist those who have been wronged as this case moves forward, and are investigating what legal remedies the SPJA may have, if any, against those who violated the wonderful, joyous atmosphere of AX.

Very Respectfully,

Marc Perez
Chief Executive Officer
Society for the Promotion of Japanese Animation — at Los Angles Convention Center.

For anyone who has not seen the video in question.
http://www.break.com/video/ugc/goprohugs-anime-expo-2013mp4-2492334[b]VIDEO UPDATED

Now for the discussion. I have put myself in the role as devils advocate. because i feel we need to protect our rights. no doubt the video is in bad taste, no doubt that this guy is breaking all sorts of con rules. but so did this guy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ucrvr0Drlg

Members of the public have a very limited scope of privacy rights when they are in public places. Basically, anyone can be photographed without their consent except when they have secluded themselves in places where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy such as dressing rooms, restrooms, medical facilities, and inside their homes.

and heres the actual law.

United States Federal Code 18 U.S.C. § 1801

(a) Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, has the intent to capture an image of a private area of an individual without their consent, and knowingly does so under circumstances in which the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

(b) In this section--
(1) the term “capture”, with respect to an image, means to videotape, photograph, film, record by any means, or broadcast;

(2) the term “broadcast” means to electronically transmit a visual image with the intent that it be viewed by a person or persons;

(3) the term “a private area of the individual” means the naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast of that individual;

(4) the term “female breast” means any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola; and

(5) the term “under circumstances in which that individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy” means--

(A) circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that he or she could disrobe in privacy, without being concerned that an image of a private area of the individual was being captured; or

(B) circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that a private area of the individual would not be visible to the public, regardless of whether that person is in a public or private place .

(c) This section does not prohibit any lawful law enforcement, correctional, or intelligence activity.

im not saying what this guy did was right, or moral. but the problem here is people are trying to attach law to morally, the 2 things are mutually exclusive. this brings to light a whole issue of 1st amendment and 4th amendment and how it pertains to us as a people. not just for the people who cosplay, or people who take pictures. what about the poeple who film when cops are beating a suspect. or the people who film at accident sites. all of these people are protected under the 1st amendment. but if we start saying, you arent protected because what you filmed was distasteful, that opens the door to all sorts of trouble. with freedom, we take the good with the bad. creepshots exist, but so do whistleblowers and good sameritans. if we stomp out one, we stomp out both. so crunchy? how do you feel about the situation? and about the freedom to take pictures/video in any public space.
4338 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / My room where els...
Offline
Posted 7/15/13
For the first video he seems to tell the girls after the hug while some girls noticed before the hug.

For the second video that was hilarious.
15296 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / houston
Offline
Posted 7/15/13
and if you watch prank videos, they ALWAYS tell the people after the bit. the prank wouldnt work if you told them before.
22704 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / SoCal, HB
Offline
Posted 7/15/13 , edited 7/15/13
It's blown out of proportion...

They're overreacting

but I do think that he should have been so sneaky about it

on another note, free hugs go around in AX? pretty sweet XD
Banned
34175 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M / Stoke, England
Offline
Posted 7/15/13
Nyeeee, conventions sound fun. I feel like that's the one thing I can't fault America on, they got some fun-ass shit.
17429 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Oregon Coast
Online
Posted 7/15/13
People knew what the guy was doiing in the first video and if not he soon told after the fact. Personally I think it was done in poor taste.

As for the second video I think it's hilarious, I've seen all of his other videos before dressed as Deadpool, but for the most part photobombing is looked down upon at cons.
15296 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / houston
Offline
Posted 7/15/13
im sure we agree that it was in poor taste, but do you think that what he did was illegal?
27 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / UK
Offline
Posted 7/15/13
It's probably not illegal, but he really should have asked for their permission. Like you said, pranks do this all the time, but then people usually have to ask permission to use people in their films, because they've done something embarrassing or whatnot. However, this guy just posted a video of all of them without asking them if it was okay, which for some of the girls it clearly wasn't, hence they complained. If he had gotten permission in the first instance then he could have blanked out the faces of those who didn't want to be identified.

It's difficult, a bit blown out of proportion, but I wouldn't really want my cleavage pressed up against the internet, so I'm probably a tad more biased to the girl's side.
17071 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Long Island
Offline
Posted 7/15/13
Maybe this is a stupid question but why are random women hugging him?
66790 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / ???????? ?? ?????
Offline
Posted 7/15/13
First video is already removed. That was fast.
45475 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Sydney, Australia
Online
Posted 7/15/13
Yes, what he did was illegal, you should always ask permission from somebody when publishing their photo or work of art.

It's not about being scared that my face will be stuck on to some porn website, it's about common courtesy and letting the owners know what you're about to do something with their pictures. Most of the time people will say yes anyway.
22704 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / SoCal, HB
Offline
Posted 7/15/13
It was removed for nudity... wtf

I did not see nudity, I want my money back
Posted 7/15/13
So protecting the rights of a man who posted a video of him sexually harassing and violating women without their knowledge or consent is more important than the women who were actually victimized? Got it. People have the right to take pictures and videos, it is a convention, yet most of the conventions I've been to there is usually a rule about asking for a person's consent before doing such things and this was not the case. From what I read from their Facebook page, a lot of people are upset about this incident and I don't blame them.




26541 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / F / Seireitei, Soul S...
Offline
Posted 7/15/13
Since I can't watch the first video anymore to see what it was like since YouTube took it down already, I'll just have to go by what other people said that's in it to post. If this guy was filming women while they hugged him and their breasts were pressed against his chest and you could actually see the skin of the breasts in the video, then that is indeed sexual harassment and is illegal. In fact, the law that you quoted even says that it is illegal to do this:
(3) the term “a private area of the individual” means the naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast of that individual;
(5) the term “under circumstances in which that individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy” means--
(B) circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that a private area of the individual would not be visible to the public, regardless of whether that person is in a public or private place.

They were at an anime convention trying to have fun. Yes, they were in a public place, but he didn't ask to film them, or ask for permission to broadcast it anywhere, and they had reasonable reason to believe that their close-up breasts wouldn't be filmed and aired elsewhere, regardless of whether they knew that the camera was there or not. Yes, they may have noticed it and thought it a bit odd, but most people aren't going to ask him outright if he's filming the hugs. They don't know if he's just storing it there to film other things and most people are too polite to ask something like that.

So yes, what he did was illegal, and yes, the convention has a right to persue legal action against him, and the women that he filmed totally have the right to be angry and upset about it. I know that I would be if something like this happened to me.
17429 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Oregon Coast
Online
Posted 7/15/13

BlackRose0607 wrote:

Since I can't watch the first video anymore to see what it was like since YouTube took it down already, I'll just have to go by what other people said that's in it to post. If this guy was filming women while they hugged him and their breasts were pressed against his chest and you could actually see the skin of the breasts in the video, then that is indeed sexual harassment and is illegal. In fact, the law that you quoted even says that it is illegal to do this:
(3) the term “a private area of the individual” means the naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast of that individual;
(5) the term “under circumstances in which that individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy” means--
(B) circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that a private area of the individual would not be visible to the public, regardless of whether that person is in a public or private place.

They were at an anime convention trying to have fun. Yes, they were in a public place, but he didn't ask to film them, or ask for permission to broadcast it anywhere, and they had reasonable reason to believe that their close-up breasts wouldn't be filmed and aired elsewhere, regardless of whether they knew that the camera was there or not. Yes, they may have noticed it and thought it a bit odd, but most people aren't going to ask him outright if he's filming the hugs. They don't know if he's just storing it there to film other things and most people are too polite to ask something like that.

So yes, what he did was illegal, and yes, the convention has a right to persue legal action against him, and the women that he filmed totally have the right to be angry and upset about it. I know that I would be if something like this happened to me.


I like how you omitted part 4 to fit your own definition.

"(4) the term “female breast” means any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola"

By this law what he did was legal but against the rules of the convention.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.