Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not asking about the legal line--asking what YOU would be comfortable with. Regarding YOUR children. Are you saying, anything regarding your children is fine as long as it's legal?
Yes. I'm fine with anyone taking pictures or videos and doing whatever they want with anything legal. Why would I care?
Human trafficking has no age limit. I'd talk to my neighbor, and ask them to remove the video.
If they comply, you're done... If they don't comply, complain to Facebook about his post, and they should remove it.
Keep talking to Facebook until it is to your satisfaction.
Good luck
Human trafficking...of what? Facebook videos? Hahaha!!
If the video made me uncomfortable enough that I discussed it with him and politely asked him to remove it, I got anything remotely resembling some of the replies in this thread, I would know this person is NOT someone I will engage with to any degree. A decent neighbor/friend would be understanding towards someone's feelings about their own kid. Someone who responds with "well it's my right! Blah blah blah..." is an insensitive asshat and bizarre social misfit with whom I would not waste my time. Nor would I want my kids picking up bad manners and rude behavior from his kids--who likely lack the same sense of boundaries and proprietary as their parent.
That would be great for both of you because you share different values and I'm sure in his opinion he would think of you as the bizarre misfit for making such a big deal over nothing.
That would be great for both of you because you share different values and I'm sure in his opinion he would think of you as the bizarre misfit for making such a big deal over nothing.
In what world is a polite request regarding one's child a "big deal"??
Anyone is legally entitled to photograph or video someone who is on their property. They also have the right to photograph anyone else while they are standing on their own or public property, even if the person being photographed is on his or her own private property.
You sign the waiver for the school because the school wants to be able to have the option of using the images for commercial or marketing purposes.
Okay. My point stands. I think it would have been nice for the neighbor to have asked before posting the video.
In what world is a polite request regarding one's child a "big deal"??
It's the idea that you HAVE to. It's the idea that photography now has to happen only when explicit permission has been given vs the "free flowing" way it's been going on for years. It's the idea that your children are so absolutely yours that images created of them by an external tool belong to you, when they're nothing but graphical images painted by reflected light and nothing has been taken from anybody.
It's the idea, suggested by some but not necessarily you, that a freaking FAMILY FRIEND taking a photo of the 2 respective children playing together outdoors in broad daylight is somehow creepy, and that such wacked-out thinking should become the standard baseline and pollute and taint something which was by all indications totally natural and downright nice. It's the reality of how such misguided thinking even causes people to get laws confused and believe that it's actually a legal requirement for one to snap a child's photo when it's not at all the case. It's the idea that all but requiring consent means that we harass and intimidate a man at a park snapping photos of the scenery around him, which is well within his legal rights and not at all creepy, and call the police on him like he's really any sort of threat.
Wow. No, merely a reminder that there are some limits to what you can record without someone's knowledge or consent.
What was that about "GOAL POSTS"?? This thread isn't about "people in the background" and it's really not even about "people sharing their moments" (super-cheesy phrasing, btw. Which is probably a good reason why people should share less of their moments.)
Yeah...what was that thing you wrote...? "STOP MOVING THE GOAL POSTS" Right. This^^^ situation is nothing like the one presented here in this thread!!
The moral high ground is not using someone else's kid for laughs. It is also respecting another family's privacy. The moral high ground is asking a friend or neighbor before you post a video in which their kid is the primary--or only--subject. The moral high ground is also demurring to the parent when the subject matter is their minor child. This is not even a difficult question.
So you are allowed to present scenarios very different than the OP but if someone else does its wrong.
So you are allowed to present scenarios very different than the OP but if someone else does its wrong.
Got it.
With that kind of logic, what is the point?
Hahahahahaha!!! Seriously...?
I was pointing out the flaws in YOUR logic: YOU kept harping about "GOAL POSTS!!" abd yet then--in the same post!--presented a host of scenarios NOTHING like the situation here!!
My question earlier wasn't even "moving the goal posts," it was a delibereate attempt to discover where others, who hold a different opinion than my own, start getting uncomfortable with the use images of their children. Stated as such with, "where do you draw line?" To which many of you answered as long as it's legal you're fine with it. "Legal" leaves an incredibly broad range of scenarios where someone could videotape your kid and you'd be completely ok with it--that is surprising to me.
I've stated several times that there is difference between someone else's kid being IN a video vs someone else's kid being the SUBJECT of the video. But rather than address the concerns of manners and neighborliness and propriety, lots of folks just keep saying "it's legal!!!" That's an odd response, IMO. A very odd response, in both question-answer-logic and in everyday-social-awareness.
It's the reality of how such misguided thinking even causes people to get laws confused and believe that it's actually a legal requirement for one to snap a child's photo when it's not at all the case. It's the idea that all but requiring consent means that we harass and intimidate a man at a park snapping photos of the scenery around him, which is well within his legal rights and not at all creepy, and call the police on him like he's really any sort of threat.
The bolded, coupled with the same man's near-hysteria in proclaiming that taking numerous photos and videos of other people's children--even after he's been asked to stop--is "completely natural" and "the most natural thing in the world"...yeah, that adds up to red flag level creepy behavior. Assuming, of course, it is the same person in both cases. But it's not illegal to be creepy, so why does he care if others around him find him creepy??
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
