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.
They are the same in terms of rights. If anything, the neighbor had even more rights, considering the fact that it was on his own privately owned property.
I thought we were talking about privacy and a mother's feelings regarding what her neighbor chose to do with a video her child. I didn't think we were talking liability or legal rights here? In that case, perhaps the parent could report the video to try to have it removed: https://www.facebook.com/help/contact/144059062408922
Parents have sued over social media posts before, for photos of their children being posted without their permission. It shouldn't have to come to that, though. People should practice common decency and be considerate. But, I suppose that, like showing respect for people's privacy, is also something of a forgotten art these days.
There is a difference between security cameras and a private individual filming your child, creating a video, and broadcasting it on their social media site.
There is also a difference between getting caught in the background of a photo or video when you are out in public, and what happened to the OP and her child. Not the same thing.
What would be the difference? In both cases, the child is being filmed, and in both cases, that film could potentially be used for some nefarious activity. The law protects these actions the same.
Unless you think it's wrong for your child to be in public, I don't think a parent should worry too much about their child being filmed in public.
The very second you open your front {or back} door for anyone to go outside, ASSUME you are being filmed/taped/videoed/watched. In this day in age, it is so true. There are video cameras watching every move one makes, especially in public. Go to Walmart lately? how many times were you on camera, BESIDES the ones in the pharmacological aisles alerting you to fact that "video is rolling".
Cities have video cameras everywhere to "prohibit and deter crime", to "catch criminals in the act"...whether it be thug gang violence of murder, or a kid stealing a bike, or a person illegally parking and running into a store "for a pack of gum, only for a minute".
Private companies have video cameras everywhere, some even illegally {or highly not suggested} in places like locker rooms or restrooms.
THEY DO have their good uses, but...nefarious actions will also arise.
Now: I/we DON'T DO facebook, and this is one reason why, I cannot, however, stop anyone from filming me or mine and posting it. In fact due to the fact that I don't "DO" Facebook, I would not be able to access the pages you mention.
We have a friend who finally face-booked, mainly to keep an eye on wayward son's pages, and was extremely disheartened that an alcoholic friend of his posted a pic of our non-drinking friend with a beer can sitting in front of our friend, making it look like he was drinking and partying with the caption "partying with my peeps"..... He was outraged, but we noted to him that is a chance you take.
SO SHORT ANSWER: if he didn't/isn't doing anything illegal, you cant say/do much. YOU CAN express to him that you prefer he NOT post pics of your child[ren] on the net.web, or any sites. Perhaps he will listen, perhaps not.
Keep an eye on his pages, as if he DOES show "unseeming", "untoward" or "nefarious" attitude towards pics suggesting he has more than a passing fancy of a quick candid pic of ANY kid, then you can let him know you will report it to the police, as you might consider it him stalking your child.
But in the interest of "neighborly harmony", don't make a big deal. Not yet.
Oh, and right now, I'm watching you
{LOL not really-but if you were on a camera I COULD be}
The part where you said he is an azzhat if he tells you no and that he would prefer to keep the video posted.
He has the right to tell you no and he doesn't need to give you a reason. If he says no, a simple "OK, thanks for listening to my request" from you should suffice.
He's not an azzhat for deciding to keep up a video of something that you don't agree with.
I never said I'd call him an asshat in our conversation! I said would KNOW he was an asshat when he bizarrely asserted that his rights to have videos of my children outweighed my request to remove said videos of my children. I am far too well-mannered to call him silly names to his face. That would merely exacerbate the situation.
But yes, he is simply an "azzhat for deciding to keep up a video" of my children that I don't agree with. I don't understand how you don't understand that.
The part where you said he is an azzhat if he tells you no and that he would prefer to keep the video posted.
He has the right to tell you no and he doesn't need to give you a reason. If he says no, a simple "OK, thanks for listening to my request" from you should suffice.
He's not an azzhat for deciding to keep up a video of something that you don't agree with.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion. AfternoonCoffee thinks this individual would be a "azzhat" for responding "no" and keeping the video posted. That's a valid opinion. This individual could possibly think that AfternoonCoffee is an "azzhat" for making such an absurd request. That, too, is a valid opinion.
I think it's so odd how people keep harping back to "rights" and what's "legal" when that doesn't seem to really be an issue here.
Most threads in this parenting subforum don't jump to "rights" and "it's legal!!" as the default response Any ideas why this thread is different??
Take for example all the numerous threads about kids misbehaving in restaurants. Many of these same posters blast parents for taking children out to eat. And they lament the state of parenting "these days" and yet others don't respond with "well, that's modern times so get used to it!" Or "I have the RIGHT to take my screaming children anywhere I want!!" Or "it's LEGAL to go to restaurants with misbehaving children so no one should have a problem with it!!"
This is pretty basic: legal doesn't equal "the right thing to do"!!
I thought we were talking about privacy and a mother's feelings regarding what her neighbor chose to do with a video her child. I didn't think we were talking liability or legal rights here? In that case, perhaps the parent could report the video to try to have it removed: https://www.facebook.com/help/contact/144059062408922
Parents have sued over social media posts before, for photos of their children being posted without their permission. It shouldn't have to come to that, though. People should practice common decency and be considerate. But, I suppose that, like showing respect for people's privacy, is also something of a forgotten art these days.
Privacy has never been private in the public realm. Do some research and you will find that out.
I think it's so odd how people keep harping back to "rights" and what's "legal" when that doesn't seem to really be an issue here.
Most threads in this parenting subforum don't jump to "rights" and "it's legal!!" as the default response Any ideas why this thread is different??
Take for example all the numerous threads about kids misbehaving in restaurants. Many of these same posters blast parents for taking children out to eat. And they lament the state of parenting "these days" and yet others don't respond with "well, that's modern times so get used to it!" Or "I have the RIGHT to take my screaming children anywhere I want!!" Or "it's LEGAL to go to restaurants with misbehaving children so no one should have a problem with it!!"
This is pretty basic: legal doesn't equal "the right thing to do"!!
People do have the right to take their screaming kids into restaurants. Restaurant management, however, has a superseding right to kick those people out if they deem it to be inappropriate.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion. AfternoonCoffee thinks this individual would be a "azzhat" for responding "no" and keeping the video posted. That's a valid opinion. This individual could possibly think that AfternoonCoffee is an "azzhat" for making such an absurd request. That, too, is a valid opinion.
Sure. I agree with that. Except the "absurd" part. Why is it less absurd to insist upon keeping a video up of someone else's kid? No one has really explained that. "No. I really like watching that video of your kid" or "my friends all think I'm super-hilarious because of that video I posted of your 7 year old" or even "no, I like it" ???
In polite society, however, the person with a more vested interest should have more say in the matter. Regarding children, that would be the parent. A parent shouldn't have to explain to a random neighbor why they'd like the video removed--what if they is a custody battle? The parent should have explain all that to the dude, but y'all don't think he had any responsibility to say WHY that video means so much to him? That's weird. Who wouldn't just honor a parent's request??
I'm really trying to understand this opposing point of view.
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.
I said would KNOW he was an asshat when he bizarrely asserted that his rights to have videos of my children outweighed my request to remove said videos of my children. I am far too well-mannered to call him silly names to his face. That would merely exacerbate the situation. 
Any ideas why this thread is different??
