Ethical question - taking one picture with a cell phone/camera at a production.- Page 5

[D2]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 12:47am

...oh, never mind...

Updated On: 3/29/07 at 12:47 AM

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 1:07am

Think of it as visiting someone's house. If they didn't want you to do something, would you respect them and not do it, or would you just discount their request and do it anyway because you don't feel it's rude? Likewise, you are visiting a Broadway theatre, a "home" for a project, and those who are involved with the project make the rules. If I see you taking pictures, the rules state that I must stop you, and believe me, I will. I am a hardass usher, and you may not like it, but you're going to follow the rules.

[D2]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 1:09am

I think I love you, ShbrtAlley44. Where are you ushering?

[Fenchurch]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 1:09am

I have never paid $100 to visit someone's home. And if I ever do, you better be damned sure that I will be taking flash photography.

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 1:14am

You are paying for the privilege of seeing a show. Just because you've paid does not mean you're entitled to do whatever you want. You're not required to spend the money. If you can't follow the rules, stay home.

ETA: D2, I sub usher at Jujamcyn houses, usually the St. James, the Kerr, or the Hirschfeld.
Updated On: 3/29/07 at 01:14 AM

[D2]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 1:18am

Thanks, Shbrt! Three of my favorite houses.

Well, there you have it, Fen. Stay out of Jujamcyn theatres. Although frankly, I'd love to see you and Shbrt go head to head.

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 1:20am

:) I'm glad. They're all beautiful houses. The James needs a good deal of redoing, though.

[jo]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 1:40am

Perhaps a related issue --

How do you explain why many ( millions) of people watch copyrighted or illegally-obtained materials on YouTube or similar sites? I am very surprised at how excerpts from stage shows or TV or movies are used to make another video or how the excerpts are perfunctorily uploaded by some and viewed by so many.

[aspiringactress]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 1:51am

While I personally do not believe that taking pictures in Theatres is a good activity to partake in, I am shocked at the scary "The Law is the Law" mentality in this thread...seriously?

That is the kind of mentality that inevitably leads to corrupt government. "It is illegal so we can't do it because." is an irresponsible mindset because it allows the goverment's exploitation of power and violation of civil rights. Look at any violation of civil rights that was fought off by the people...those were the people who thought about the law instead of blindly obeying. Look at the history of civil disobedience globally.

It's fine if you don't want to take pictures in a theatre, but do it because of your own convictions, not because the Law says so...and try jaywalking...if nobody's coming anyway, you'll save yourself some time.

[Bobby Maler]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 2:08am

WOW. Askin' the tough questions, Jo. Good one!

I suppose because on YouTube you can only watch short little clips. I'm not watching an entire film or an entire show. I don't ever feel like I'm taking money away from the creatives who earned it.

Plus, we're used to feeling like TV should be free anyways.

For theatre, with prices being what they are, watching the clips can help me decide whether or not I'm going to go. Also, because theatre is so ephemeral, I love the fact that great performances like those on Tony telecasts from years ago, are preserved and archived for all time. They can be an educational tool. If YouTube made me pay .99 cents to be able to sit and watch the entire Tony Telecast from say, 1976, even if i couldn't save it or see it again without forking over more money, I would gladly pay for it (although I'm kinda dreading the inevitable--the day when ads get added before the clips on YouTube).

[Fenchurch]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 11:01am

aspiring actress- THANK YOU.

Very well put. Personally Im against it too, I was really trying to make a point. It really frightens me when this Rules Are Rules attitude becomes to prevalent.
Its like people can't make decisions for themselves anymore.

USE YOUR OWN JUDGEMENT PEOPLE

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 11:11am

Um, we're talking about rules that make sense and are fair. You're the ones violating privacy in this case, not the government. What worries ME, fenchurch, is when the "I'm entitled" attitude goes too far, and common decency and respect is ignored altogether.

[Fenchurch]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 11:28am

Shbrt:

For $100, I feel entitled. not to annoy anyone else, but to do whatever I damn well please that doesn't stop anyone else from having a good time.


I belive as long as I dont bother or hurt anyone else (i.e. common decency) I can do whatever I damn well please.

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 11:34am

But how does that entitle you to willfully ignore house rules? Do you feel less entitled in a movie theatre, where you've paid 10 dollars? Are you more entitled than people who buy rush tickets or standing room or TDF or TKTS tickets for less money? I don't understand this reasoning at all. It's disrespectful. That is not common decency. Common decency is respect for all those around you, and that includes the staff of the theatre.
Updated On: 3/29/07 at 11:34 AM

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 11:38am

In addition, as you will read on the back of your ticket, you're paying and thus entering into an agreement that you will abide by the house rules. These are not unfair or tyrannical rules - if they were, I'd be all for questioning them. There is nothing unfair about asking people not to take photographs. It's not like we're ordering you to turn over your belongings to us for "safety reasons." That is something I'd question.

[MLE]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 11:53am

Fenchurch & aspiring actress -
Yes. I read this whole thread and I can't believe all of this "a law is a law" talk. I sure wish I was perfect like everyone else in this thread. I know, I know, I'm a degenerate and the scum of the Earth because I question the law and authority. It's a real problem; I should look into a 12 step program.

Sarcasm aside, it should be about courtesy and respect. Yes, flash photography is distracting and dangerous, I get that. I've experienced that. Flash should be a big no-no simply because it can directly harm the actors. But if there's no flash, you're not bothering anyone, no one sees you, I don't see the big deal. There are production photos available, and yes there is consent and money there, but if you're not going to sell what you took, who gives a damn? Just crack down on the people who make money off of someone else's intellectual property, not the people who just want momentos. We desperately need to expand the Fair Use Act.

We're too obsessed with copyright laws in this country anyway. Not that we should do away with them, they are there to protect the the authors and artists, but lately that's been changed. These people are getting less and less...the money's going elsewhere. Look at how slimy and corrupt mass media institutions like the RIAA and the MPAA can kick us around and abuse the American public all while hiding behind the guise of "the law". It makes me sick, and the sentiments expressed in this thread are exactly why we're doomed to live like this.

AND if you DO want to talk law, technically, it's illegal to record performances without the performers' consent. Loophole. Updated On: 3/29/07 at 11:53 AM

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 12:00pm

I've taken photos of final performance curtain calls, as many do, and they seem to ignore the rule at that point.

Once or twice I have taken a curtain shot, or the stage before the performance begins. Never MID-performance.

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 12:12pm

MLE, can I ask how it is possible to differentiate between people who are going to, say, post pictures on the internet for all to see or sell them from the people who just want a little Polaroid of their own? I am instructed to stop anyone who takes any picture. You cannot just do whatever you want all the time. No one is saying you're wrong in questioning CERTAIN laws and rules, if they are indeed unfair and tyrannical and invasive. But how are the rules in Broadway theatres invasive? For God's sake, most of them already let the audience members take food and drinks to their seats. You are coddled enough; the least you can do is respect these rules, since they are not asking much of you.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 12:24pm

While it is illegal to record a performance through pictures, video, or audio recordings, it is as equally illegal for them to confiscate any personal items you may have. At the very most they can call the police, but neither ushers, managers, nor security guards can legally remove you or "manhandle" you or take away your items (they can, though deny entry, but once you're inside it's another story). Even if they make you "check" the item for retrieval letter, the most they can do if you refuse is call the police and let them handle it.

[MLE]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 12:37pm

Shbrt-
The only show I've even taken pictures of or recorded in anyway was my younger sister's high school play where it was not prohibited.
I haven't done it for any professional performance, I'm just not opposed to it. Why? Courtesy to those around me. How about banning seat kicking? There have been countless threads about pet peeves we all have when we go to the theatre that hinder our enjoyment. BUT, if you are not bothering anyone, there's really no disrespect.
And I'm not saying you have to know what people are going to do with them. I think we should let the 'real' authorities handle people who seek to profit off of another's show.

No one is saying you're wrong in questioning CERTAIN laws and rules, if they are indeed unfair and tyrannical and invasive.

That may sound fine, but we could go on for hours about just what exactly is "unjust". Life is one huge gray area, with shades of darker and light. EVERY law should be questioned and debated, then and only then if they hold up, should they be kept. I'm not going to limit which ones I can question.

There are two sides to this argument, the legal side and the courtesy side. I've covered courtesy. What I really have a problem with is, how ridiculous copyright laws are nowadays. Like someone said earlier in the thread, even the houselights are covered? Give me a break! Doesn't the strike anyone else as overkill??
And, back to what I said before, I do consider that unjust. Because, let's face it, it is unnecessarily criminalizing otherwise innocuous behavior. Most of the people who take a picture before the show begins in the house are just recording their friends having a fun night out. They're not criminals, nor should they have to be treated as such. Would I walk into someone's house and start snapping? Never. Because that is their home. A theatre needs an audience, and we pay to come in there and keep them running. While that doesn't give us the right to run amok, I shouldn't have to feel like I'm in an uptight environment and that I'm being 'watched'. Which, considering all of these laws and conditions, I do, even if I have no intention of recording the show in anyway.

And, as an actor. I have no problem with recording of any kind while I'm on stage...as long as I don't see a flash. Even a full video recording of the show is going to be circulated (if it even ever is at all) on such a small scale, it's pretty harmless. Updated On: 3/29/07 at 12:37 PM

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 12:47pm

I never treat people like criminals. I ask them to put their cameras away, and they do. If they continue, which I have yet to experience, I would warn them again, and call the house manager if it persists after that.

If you feel that it is so terribly unfair and traumatizing that you are not allowed to take pictures, I suggest you write to the theatre companies themselves. But until that blessed day when it is legalized, don't do it.

[Fenchurch]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 12:58pm

shburt,

You have treated me like a criminal and in your last post, you have certainly painted a criminal picture. (Until that blessed day...etc).

Your self-righteous attitude just makes me want to walk into your theater and take a bunch of pictures of you.

[D2]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 1:01pm

And while you may think that just snapping a quiet little picture without a flash isn't disturbing to other audience members, let me assure you that it is. I'm not going to insult anyone's intelligence by describing the mechanics of taking a photograph, but the necessary body movements required of a neighboring audience member tend to pull my focus and distract me, taking me out of the world of the play I have also paid up to $100 to see, and into that person's world, a world in which I most decidely have very little interest.

[MLE]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 1:13pm

It's no more distracting than sitting by a small child, they can't sit still for longer than 4 minutes. There are so many things that can distract you. Basically, if anyone around you is anything less than a complete statue during the performance, your eye is going to be drawn from the stage at least somewhat. Still, we don't ban other annoying behavior.

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 3/29/07 at 1:17pm

Fenchurch, I haven't treated you like a criminal - I've treated you like the disrespectful individual you are. And if you do take pictures of me in the theatre, I can have you fined, so hey, feel free.

And it's called sarcasm. Did I say MLE should be arrested and prosecuted? No. I was sarcastic. Updated On: 3/29/07 at 01:17 PM