Etiquette Hell

General Etiquette => Etiquette of the Rich and Famous => Topic started by: hjaye on June 17, 2011, 01:23:43 PM

Title: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: hjaye on June 17, 2011, 01:23:43 PM
A friend of mine was at the Crescent Hotel in Dallas last week waiting for a final interview for a job.  She was there a little early, so she was waiting downstairs.  While sitting there she noticed a lot of large men walking through he lobby, she didn't know who they were, but considering the bit of a commotion she noticed she figured these were well known people.

She asked someone who they were and found out that they were the Miami Heat basketball team.  Now my friend does not go anywhere without her camera, so she took it out to take some pictures.  When she did that a very large man who she thinks was a body guard came over to her and told her no pictures were allowed. 

Another lady had started to take out a camera and she was also told no pictures were allowed to be taken.  What I thought was over the top was a woman who had already managed to get some pictures using her cell phone.  The body guard took the phone out of the woman's hand, deleted the pictures off her phone and then gave it back to her.


Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Sabbyfrog2 on June 17, 2011, 01:54:33 PM
Not SS at all of the Heat IMO actually. They weren't the ones doing it.
Is it abrupt and possible rude of the bodygaurd? Yeah I'd say so but it's his job. It's not his job to care about your feelings, just protect his clients. A lot of damage can be done with photos taken of sorts players. Their "image" is kinda protected and you can't photograph them without permission.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wulfie on June 17, 2011, 02:17:57 PM
I don't think it is SS at all for them not to want thier pictures taken. It IS SS if you try to do it after you have been asked not to but from what you wrote, I don't think that was the case with any of the people you listed.

My verdict: No SS in this story.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: jimithing on June 17, 2011, 02:28:31 PM
Not SS at all of the Heat IMO actually. They weren't the ones doing it.
Is it abrupt and possible rude of the bodygaurd? Yeah I'd say so but it's his job. It's not his job to care about your feelings, just protect his clients. A lot of damage can be done with photos taken of sorts players. Their "image" is kinda protected and you can't photograph them without permission.

I disagree with this aspect. I can understand why they don't want to have their picture taken, and I don't take pictures of famous people for this reason, but there is no expectation of privacy when they are out in public and you don't have to obtain permission to take a picture of a Heat player out at a restaurant or out shopping. Now, if the hotel, being a private business, has a rule about this, then I think that's different and they have a right to make that rule.

I also think it was completely out of line for the bodyguard to take the woman's camera, her property, and delete the pictures. He's not a law enforcement officer. He's a private citizen, paid by the Heat. I do think he crossed the line there.

Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wittyone on June 17, 2011, 02:35:30 PM
Not SS at all of the Heat IMO actually. They weren't the ones doing it.
Is it abrupt and possible rude of the bodygaurd? Yeah I'd say so but it's his job. It's not his job to care about your feelings, just protect his clients. A lot of damage can be done with photos taken of sorts players. Their "image" is kinda protected and you can't photograph them without permission.

I disagree with this aspect. I can understand why they don't want to have their picture taken, and I don't take pictures of famous people for this reason, but there is no expectation of privacy when they are out in public and you don't have to obtain permission to take a picture of a Heat player out at a restaurant or out shopping. Now, if the hotel, being a private business, has a rule about this, then I think that's different and they have a right to make that rule.

I also think it was completely out of line for the bodyguard to take the woman's camera, her property, and delete the pictures. He's not a law enforcement officer. He's a private citizen, paid by the Heat. I do think he crossed the line there.



This is how I see it too.  No one has the right to not have their picture taken when they are out in public.  If they did the tabloids/celebrity mags would all be out of business.  One can ask that no pictures be taken, but that is all.  If the hotel had a rule about it then it would be up to the hotel manager to address the situation.  And to physically take the phone from a woman and delete what was then her property is all sorts of wrong.  I say the team is SS, because the bodyguard is acting under their instructions, not his own.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Oxymoroness on June 17, 2011, 02:40:08 PM
I think that the problem is that, especially with the higher pixel rate cameras, is that it is easier and easier to sell a photo taken from a cell-phone camera. That, I think is where the concern is.

In the U.S., with one notable exception, even a famous person's image is protected. It is probably far cheaper to have a bodyguard offend someone by swiping their camera to delete the pics and hand it back than it would be to battle it out in court, should that photo have been sold for publication. (And it gets complicated when a person uses their image in a professional capacity.)

ETA: I just double-checked myself, and it's actually even more complicated than that. I'm still thinking that they probably hired a bodyguard because it is cheaper than constantly going to court and/or hiring a PR firm to undo bad publicity.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: ArizonaGirl77 on June 17, 2011, 02:42:04 PM
I think that the problem is that, especially with the higher pixel rate cameras, is that it is easier and easier to sell a photo taken from a cell-phone camera. That, I think is where the concern is.

In the U.S., with one notable exception, even a famous person's image is protected. It is probably far cheaper to have a bodyguard offend someone by swiping their camera to delete the pics and hand it back than it would be to battle it out in court, should that photo have been sold for publication. (And it gets complicated when a person uses their image in a professional capacity.)

I disagree - he had no right to physically take someone else's property to delete the photos. He could have stood behind the woman while she deleted them but I do not think he had the right to remove the camera from her possession and delete the photos.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wonderflonium on June 17, 2011, 02:42:50 PM
Not SS at all of the Heat IMO actually. They weren't the ones doing it.
Is it abrupt and possible rude of the bodygaurd? Yeah I'd say so but it's his job. It's not his job to care about your feelings, just protect his clients. A lot of damage can be done with photos taken of sorts players. Their "image" is kinda protected and you can't photograph them without permission.

I disagree with this aspect. I can understand why they don't want to have their picture taken, and I don't take pictures of famous people for this reason, but there is no expectation of privacy when they are out in public and you don't have to obtain permission to take a picture of a Heat player out at a restaurant or out shopping. Now, if the hotel, being a private business, has a rule about this, then I think that's different and they have a right to make that rule.

I also think it was completely out of line for the bodyguard to take the woman's camera, her property, and delete the pictures. He's not a law enforcement officer. He's a private citizen, paid by the Heat. I do think he crossed the line there.

Pod.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wittyone on June 17, 2011, 02:46:53 PM
I think that the problem is that, especially with the higher pixel rate cameras, is that it is easier and easier to sell a photo taken from a cell-phone camera. That, I think is where the concern is.

In the U.S., with one notable exception, even a famous person's image is protected. It is probably far cheaper to have a bodyguard offend someone by swiping their camera to delete the pics and hand it back than it would be to battle it out in court, should that photo have been sold for publication. (And it gets complicated when a person uses their image in a professional capacity.)

I don't know that we can talk about this without getting into legalities, but I'm not sure this is true.  Celebrities, who absolutely use their image to sell themselves, have their picture taken all the time, without their permission.  Photographers, even amateurs then can sell those images to magazines and websites, and even newspapers.  The photographee doesn't get a cut of the profits, only the photographer.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Oxymoroness on June 17, 2011, 02:54:37 PM
I think that the problem is that, especially with the higher pixel rate cameras, is that it is easier and easier to sell a photo taken from a cell-phone camera. That, I think is where the concern is.

In the U.S., with one notable exception, even a famous person's image is protected. It is probably far cheaper to have a bodyguard offend someone by swiping their camera to delete the pics and hand it back than it would be to battle it out in court, should that photo have been sold for publication. (And it gets complicated when a person uses their image in a professional capacity.)

I disagree - he had no right to physically take someone else's property to delete the photos. He could have stood behind the woman while she deleted them but I do not think he had the right to remove the camera from her possession and delete the photos.
I wasn't saying that it was not rude or even nice... just less complicated.

If there were some guaranteed way to ensure that a snapped celebrity photo wouldn't be sold, it'd be a moot point. Personal use isn't a problem. So I can understand why a celebrity or organization would be more forceful in making sure that the photos would be deleted.

Could the woman sue the bodyguard? Sure. But is she like to? I highly doubt it, and that's probably what the Heat and other celebrities are banking on.

Someone brought up the photos in the tabloids... Tabloids get sued all.the.time. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they count that as the cost of doing business and budget appropriately. If anything, those lawsuits — especially the highly published ones — probably increase readership.

Is any of this nice or civilized? No. But it is reality.

So who was rude? In my book, everyone.

The woman was told that they didn't want their pictures taken, but did anyway.

The bodyguard could have accomplished the same thing in a nicer way.

The Heat hired someone and gave them license to abuse their fans.

ETA: I modified my original statement because I don't understand it as well as I thought I did.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: camlan on June 17, 2011, 02:56:46 PM
I think if the Heat players did not want their pictures taken, they should not have been in the hotel lobby. Any large hotel has several entrances, and I'm sure there's a way to get celebrities to and from their rooms without the general public being able to see them. By entering the public space, the players took the risk that their pictures might be taken.

If anyone had tried to take my cell phone or camera, I'd have been screaming bloody murder, and calling the police. A private bodyguard does not have the right to take my property and do anything to it. A police officer, yes. A hired bodyguard, no.

Being a celebrity has downsides and having your picture taken when you are out in public is one of them. That's how paparazzi make their living. And celebrities are annoyed by paparazzi, but there is only so much they can do about them.

Quote
Not SS at all of the Heat IMO actually. They weren't the ones doing it.
Is it abrupt and possible rude of the bodyguard? Yeah I'd say so but it's his job.

It's an assumption, but I'm assuming that the bodyguards were acting under orders from the Heat. Therefore, if you want to call this SS behavior, it originates with the Heat.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Maujer on June 17, 2011, 02:58:49 PM
YES! They're horribly rude SS's! Send them to ehell!

Says the diehard Celtics fan who should probanly not be trusted in these matters.  ;)
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Oxymoroness on June 17, 2011, 02:59:12 PM
I think that the problem is that, especially with the higher pixel rate cameras, is that it is easier and easier to sell a photo taken from a cell-phone camera. That, I think is where the concern is.

In the U.S., with one notable exception, even a famous person's image is protected. It is probably far cheaper to have a bodyguard offend someone by swiping their camera to delete the pics and hand it back than it would be to battle it out in court, should that photo have been sold for publication. (And it gets complicated when a person uses their image in a professional capacity.)

I don't know that we can talk about this without getting into legalities, but I'm not sure this is true.  Celebrities, who absolutely use their image to sell themselves, have their picture taken all the time, without their permission.  Photographers, even amateurs then can sell those images to magazines and websites, and even newspapers.  The photographee doesn't get a cut of the profits, only the photographer.

I'm dancing around what I know as far as copyright law to avoid getting into legalities. But I do know from first-hand experience that there are those in the world who operate on the "it's not a problem until I get caught" business plan — the point where he had a filing cabinet dedicated to cease and desist letters.

I did some double-checking, and it's even more complicated than I thought. (Scary, because I have to have a basic understanding... I have some reading to do!)

About the guy from above? (But I do know from first-hand experience that there are those in the world who operate on the "it's not a problem until I get caught" business plan — the point where he had a filing cabinet dedicated to cease and desist letters.) Totally true. He didn't worry about legalities until he got caught.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wonderflonium on June 17, 2011, 03:03:35 PM
Tabloids get sued for false stories and pictures taken in private spaces (eg, the guy who used a telephoto lens to snap pics of Jennifer Aniston while she was in her back yard). They don't get sued for publishing pictures of things that happened in public. Everyone, including celebrities, can be photographed in public without permission.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: gollymolly2 on June 17, 2011, 03:10:52 PM
Legally you can take a picture of anyone, famous or not, in a public space because there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in your face when you take your face out into the public sphere.  What the photo-taker cannot do is then appropriate their name or image without the famous person's consent for a commercial advantage.  There is absolutely nothing illegal about taking a picture of a famous person in a hotel room for your own use.  Tabloids get sued because they print stories that they completely make up and because they take pictures in private areas (eg with a telephoto lens in someone's backyard).

So the legalities are totally irrelevant here.  Even though I hate the heat (particularly one person) with a burning passion, I do have some sympathy for all famous people who are hounded constantly. It must be incredibly hard to never have a moment of privacy outside your home.  So I think it's a kindness not to ogle famous people when you see them and not to take pictures/bug them for autographs.  However, I don't think there's anything rude about choosing to take their picture (as long as you're not also obstructing their path or something).  The bodyguard was fine asking people not to take pictures, in my opinion, but demanding and/or deleting photos from phones was inappropriate.



ETA: Wonderflonium, I totally missed your post before. Sorry, looks like we were really on the same wavelength, down to the telephoto lens! :)
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Sabbyfrog2 on June 17, 2011, 03:14:31 PM
 I think it's unfair to say they shouldn't have been in the lobby in the first place. That's like saying other celebs shouldn't dare go outside thier homes to go to the grocery store. Sometimes, you HAVE to go into public. I understand that there is no expectation to privacy in public places but is a private hotel considered "public". Even if it's the lobby, which almost anyone can walk into, this wasn't the Holiday Inn. The teams management likely picked this hotel because there was a minimum garauntee of privacy to the players. I don't think that the bodygaurd was polite, but it's also not  his job to be polilte. I don't condone it but I don't necassarily condemn it either, even though on an ehellion I probably should. It's his job to protect his players. And I don't necassarily blame the Heat. The team manager hired the gaurd, not the team. The team themselves likely had no say in it whatsoever.

The woman taking the picture was also incredibly rude. I don't like this culture that just because they are celebs its okay to be impolite and take their picture without permission. We don't treat regular fok like that so what makes it okay in this situation? It may be "legal" but that doesn't make it polite. Yes, with being a celeb there comes certain annoyances, like paparazzi, but in that moment, they weren't being "celebs". And the woman wasn't paparazzi. If they were running around in thier jerseys playing hoops in the lobby I'd be less sympathetic, but they weren't. They were just trying to get to thier hotel rooms.  
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Oxymoroness on June 17, 2011, 03:26:44 PM
I know that this is skating on legal territory, so I won't post the link here, but I found a fascinating article on what looks like a reputable source on this topic. My earlier thoughts were both right and wrong.

PM me if you want the link.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wonderflonium on June 17, 2011, 03:27:09 PM
I always considered getting your picture taken whenever your in public to be the price you paid for making squillions of dollars to be an actor/singer/pro-athlete.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: stitchygreyanonymouse on June 17, 2011, 03:45:55 PM
I think that the Heat were not being SS to ask (or have their employees ask) that photos not be taken, although I do think it was SS to go so far as to delete already taken photos (not to mention the legal issues with that).


The part of this story that really jumped out at me is that the friend of the OP was there for a job interview at a hotel. If I were interviewing her, and happened to see her go for her camera when high-profile clients came through, she wouldn’t be getting the job. (Granted, we don’t know what she was interviewing for, but) I think most any hotel position that might deal with high-profile clients would be looking for someone who can show some sort of respect for the privacy of the guests—meaning the employee would not go for their camera after realizing the clients’ well-known status.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: immadz on June 17, 2011, 04:20:08 PM
I think a hotel lobby is actually a private space, as it owned by the hotel itself. As such the hotel staff can request no pictures of their other patrons.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: still in va on June 17, 2011, 07:44:46 PM
i'm still trying to figure out why the Miami Heat would be in Dallas today for the Dallas Mavericks victory parade and celebration?

it's pretty unusual for the defeated team to show up for the victor's victory celebration.  was LeBron there?
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: gollymolly2 on June 17, 2011, 07:49:39 PM
i'm still trying to figure out why the Miami Heat would be in Dallas today for the Dallas Mavericks victory parade and celebration?

it's pretty unusual for the defeated team to show up for the victor's victory celebration.  was LeBron there?

I think the OP said last week.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: still in va on June 17, 2011, 07:53:40 PM
i'm still trying to figure out why the Miami Heat would be in Dallas today for the Dallas Mavericks victory parade and celebration?

it's pretty unusual for the defeated team to show up for the victor's victory celebration.  was LeBron there?

I think the OP said last week.

ah, gotcha.  it also makes sense to remember that last week the series was very close, so probably not a good time to talk to them, depending on who won the previous night.  probably a "know your audience" thing.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wonderflonium on June 17, 2011, 08:45:44 PM
I think a hotel lobby is actually a private space, as it owned by the hotel itself. As such the hotel staff can request no pictures of their other patrons.

Even if that's so, the hotel staff weren't the ones asking demanding.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Twik on June 21, 2011, 03:31:35 PM
Personally, it sounds like the typical thuggery that has invaded professional sports as almost a mark of honour. No contract between the Heat and any sponsor would have an effect on third parties who are not participants in that contract. If they don't want their pictures taken, there are certain fashion statements (veils and such) that they could use when out in public, rather than relying on assaulting their fans.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Sabbyfrog2 on June 22, 2011, 10:56:46 AM
Personally, it sounds like the typical thuggery that has invaded professional sports as almost a mark of honour. No contract between the Heat and any sponsor would have an effect on third parties who are not participants in that contract. If they don't want their pictures taken, there are certain fashion statements (veils and such) that they could use when out in public, rather than relying on assaulting their fans.

Why should they have to resort to wearing veils? That seems a bit extreme to me. Again, celebs are people too. And yes, they make gazillions to do what they do but they are still entitled to and expected to behave in the the same polite behaviour that everyone else is. A hotel lobby doesn't count as a public enough space for me to make taking thier picture okay.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wonderflonium on June 22, 2011, 11:10:41 AM
A hotel lobby doesn't count as a public enough space for me to make taking thier picture okay.

Out of curiosity, why not? I mean, it's a space that is open to the public, so I don't understand why it would be considered more private than the street outside.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Twik on June 22, 2011, 11:29:06 AM
Personally, it sounds like the typical thuggery that has invaded professional sports as almost a mark of honour. No contract between the Heat and any sponsor would have an effect on third parties who are not participants in that contract. If they don't want their pictures taken, there are certain fashion statements (veils and such) that they could use when out in public, rather than relying on assaulting their fans.

Why should they have to resort to wearing veils? That seems a bit extreme to me. Again, celebs are people too. And yes, they make gazillions to do what they do but they are still entitled to and expected to behave in the the same polite behaviour that everyone else is. A hotel lobby doesn't count as a public enough space for me to make taking thier picture okay.

Have you ever been in a hotel lobby, and inadvertently had your picture taken by a fellow tourist? If so, were you entitled to seize their camera until all offending photos were deleted? THAT is "extreme" to me.

The players don't *have* to wear veils. But if their image is so important to them that they assault people for trying to capture it in public - people who are the fans who pay their salaries - they should either learn to live with the inconvenience, stay out of the public eye, or quit and take up jobs where they will be treated as non-celebrities.

They cannot claim the benefits of fame, and expect none of the drawbacks. And if their sponsors think that the public will, for the sponsor's sake, refuse to take any photos except those specifically authorized by the sponsor, they have a very poor understanding of the fans to whom they are trying to sell product.

I agree that squealing and running after celebrities with your pocket camera is undignified, and rude. But that rudeness should not be met with abuse back.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Delete My Account on June 22, 2011, 12:16:57 PM
The fans don't pay their salaries entirely, and even so that doesn't mean they earn the right to violate their privacy. But I agree that the bodyguard was unnecessarily rough.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wonderflonium on June 22, 2011, 12:22:12 PM
The fans don't pay their salaries entirely, and even so that doesn't mean they earn the right to violate their privacy. But I agree that the bodyguard was unnecessarily rough.

How is it a violation of privacy to snap a photo of someone out in public?
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Maujer on June 22, 2011, 12:23:34 PM
Personally, it sounds like the typical thuggery that has invaded professional sports as almost a mark of honour. No contract between the Heat and any sponsor would have an effect on third parties who are not participants in that contract. If they don't want their pictures taken, there are certain fashion statements (veils and such) that they could use when out in public, rather than relying on assaulting their fans.

As much as I dislike them, I don't know if it's fair to blame the athletes. Security may have been over-zealous. I've been on private property (which a hotel lobby would be) before where security has done the exact same thing if they caught you taking pictures of the property or people inside the property. Once the delete the pictures, the camera is returned to you. I don't think it has anything to do with the althetes being "thugs". I don't even know how that connection was made.

If they were out in a public park, I think it would be another story.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Delete My Account on June 22, 2011, 12:29:32 PM
I agree about the "thug" remark. Besides it was the bodyguard who took action, not the athletes, so I also think that's an unfair assessment.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: gollymolly2 on June 22, 2011, 12:30:45 PM
As much as I dislike them, I don't know if it's fair to blame the athletes. Security may have been over-zealous. I've been on private property (which a hotel lobby would be) before where security has done the exact same thing if they caught you taking pictures of the property or people inside the property. Once the delete the pictures, the camera is returned to you. I don't think it has anything to do with the althetes being "thugs". I don't even know how that connection was made.

If they were out in a public park, I think it would be another story.

I agree with the bolded, that's been bugging me.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Sabbyfrog2 on June 22, 2011, 12:40:31 PM
A hotel lobby doesn't count as a public enough space for me to make taking thier picture okay.

Out of curiosity, why not? I mean, it's a space that is open to the public, so I don't understand why it would be considered more private than the street outside.
A hotel lobby doesn't count as a public enough space for me to make taking thier picture okay.

Out of curiosity, why not? I mean, it's a space that is open to the public, so I don't understand why it would be considered more private than the street outside.


Because you really have no reason to be there unless you are an employee, guest, or attending a returuant or other function taking place there. It's not a public street where anyone can be there for any reason or no reason. It's part of a private building that is paid for the the people who use it, and not open the general public for public use. Sure anyone can just walk in but they can also be asked to leave by anyone working there as it is private property and can be arrested if they refuse. You can't be asked to leave a public street. That makes a difference to me.

Personally, it sounds like the typical thuggery that has invaded professional sports as almost a mark of honour. No contract between the Heat and any sponsor would have an effect on third parties who are not participants in that contract. If they don't want their pictures taken, there are certain fashion statements (veils and such) that they could use when out in public, rather than relying on assaulting their fans.

Why should they have to resort to wearing veils? That seems a bit extreme to me. Again, celebs are people too. And yes, they make gazillions to do what they do but they are still entitled to and expected to behave in the the same polite behaviour that everyone else is. A hotel lobby doesn't count as a public enough space for me to make taking thier picture okay.


Have you ever been in a hotel lobby, and inadvertently had your picture taken by a fellow tourist? If so, were you entitled to seize their camera until all offending photos were deleted? THAT is "extreme" to me.
<snip>
I agree that squealing and running after celebrities with your pocket camera is undignified, and rude. But that rudeness should not be met with abuse back.


Of course not and I would agree that's extreme. I would however be well within my rights to ask them to delete it if I didn't want it taken as I am not outside on a public sidewalk as per my previous statement in this post. But I also don't have any reason too because people aren't clamboring to sell my image. 

I don't condone the bodyguards way of handling it but I also don't see this woman as a victim of abuse. The woman wasn't "assulted" and no one was abused. I don't like how those words is being thrown around this thread. Her private property was taken against her will, the rudely taken picture was erased, and then the camera was given back. It's rude all around and I personally wouldn't like it myself, but it's not assault or abuse. She isn't model of good manners herself so I have a hard time sympathizing. And to someone elses point, as she was there for an interview, she would not be the person I'd hire as she clearly has no sense of discretion.


They cannot claim the benefits of fame, and expect none of the drawbacks. And if their sponsors think that the public will, for the sponsor's sake, refuse to take any photos except those specifically authorized by the sponsor, they have a very poor understanding of the fans to whom they are trying to sell product.


She's not some innocent fan taking a picture of her favorite player. She didn't even know who they were until someone told her they were famous then just took a picture without their consent. Most fans ASK if they can have a picture WITH them. And The Heat players will usually oblige that within reason.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: TeamBhakta on June 22, 2011, 12:52:44 PM
I think that the Heat were not being SS to ask (or have their employees ask) that photos not be taken, although I do think it was SS to go so far as to delete already taken photos (not to mention the legal issues with that).


The part of this story that really jumped out at me is that the friend of the OP was there for a job interview at a hotel. If I were interviewing her, and happened to see her go for her camera when high-profile clients came through, she wouldn’t be getting the job. (Granted, we don’t know what she was interviewing for, but) I think most any hotel position that might deal with high-profile clients would be looking for someone who can show some sort of respect for the privacy of the guests—meaning the employee would not go for their camera after realizing the clients’ well-known status.

Very true. My old hotel jobs in Miami had specifically written out rules about that. I know one of my handbooks said (and I'm paraphrasing) "You are not allowed to ask guests for autographs, photos or memorabilia. You may not bother them about being a fan or recognizing who they are. You won't violate their privacy by letting other people know that guest is staying with us." I know the incident didn't happen in Miami, but yeah, that doesn't make someone look like great possible employee
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Sabbyfrog2 on June 23, 2011, 12:06:26 PM
I think that the Heat were not being SS to ask (or have their employees ask) that photos not be taken, although I do think it was SS to go so far as to delete already taken photos (not to mention the legal issues with that).


The part of this story that really jumped out at me is that the friend of the OP was there for a job interview at a hotel. If I were interviewing her, and happened to see her go for her camera when high-profile clients came through, she wouldn’t be getting the job. (Granted, we don’t know what she was interviewing for, but) I think most any hotel position that might deal with high-profile clients would be looking for someone who can show some sort of respect for the privacy of the guests—meaning the employee would not go for their camera after realizing the clients’ well-known status.

Very true. My old hotel jobs in Miami had specifically written out rules about that. I know one of my handbooks said (and I'm paraphrasing) "You are not allowed to ask guests for autographs, photos or memorabilia. You may not bother them about being a fan or recognizing who they are. You won't violate their privacy by letting other people know that guest is staying with us." I know the incident didn't happen in Miami, but yeah, that doesn't make someone look like great possible employee

I have a friend who works as an events coordinator in one of the high end hotels that a lot of visiting celebs stay in Miami. Privacy of the guests is their number one priority. She isn't even allowed to carry her phone while on duty unless she gets special permission and it must be turned off if she does. She is also not allowed to be there for ANY reason unless it is to work. She cant even hang out at the bar inside the lobby off the clock. It's specifically in her contract that if she so much as infers anything regarding the guest to an outside party, she can be fired and even prosecuted if it's a serious breach. Other people in the hotel are often asked to erase any pictures taken in the hotel although none of the security guards have ever taken it that far. I dont know if anyone has ever refused though.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Twik on June 23, 2011, 12:16:31 PM
I'd say I have every right to retain personal pictures, taken in a public place. And yes, a hotel lobby is a public place.

If other people have issues regarding wanting to control photos, that is their problem. There is no inherent obligation on the public to comply, even if it is something a considerate person would do. So, if Friend asks, "Would you please delete those photos?" and Bystander says "No, thank you," Friend cannot do much about it.

I agree that running to photograph strangers minding their own business is quite rude. But rudeness does not entitle the entourage to use force (even very mild) to destroy the photographs.

And what if, theoretically, I was taking a picture of something else (the lovely fountain in the lobby, perhaps) for my own enjoyment, and Big Celebrity happened to blunder into the background? Would s/he be polite to demand that I destroy a photo that I took for my own pleasure, not because of his/her status as celebrity?
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wittyone on June 23, 2011, 12:23:31 PM
I don't think there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in a hotel lobby.  In individual hotel rooms, absolutely, but not in the lobby, or even in the hallways. 

This discussion reminds of the controversy a few month ago over photos taken of a sports reporter naked in her hotel room.  They were apparently taken through her peephole. 


An individual who had a legitimate right to be in the hotel has a right to retain photos taken the lobby.
The hotel can of course have stricter requirements of its employees, as they represent and are an extension of the hotel itself.  The person interviewing for a job probably shot herself in the foot for taking the photos and demonstrating her inability to exercise discretion around VIP guests.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: kherbert05 on June 23, 2011, 01:16:33 PM
If they are in public they have no expectations of privacy they need to suck it up and deal.

http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm (http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm)
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: immadz on June 23, 2011, 07:47:37 PM
I would think the hotel lobby belonged to the person/board of people who owned the hotel. If they gave the security personnel/body guard permission to ensure no pictures were taken then that would be within their rights to do so. If the person who was taking the picture was on the street it would be a different issue. However, this person was in an area controlled by a person/body of people.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: ShadesOfGrey on June 23, 2011, 07:51:14 PM
YES! They're horribly rude SS's! Send them to ehell!

Says the diehard Celtics fan who should probanly not be trusted in these matters.  ;)

POD!

~the other diehard Celtics fan on the forum.  ;)
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wonderflonium on June 23, 2011, 07:54:12 PM
I would think the hotel lobby belonged to the person/board of people who owned the hotel. If they gave the security personnel/body guard permission to ensure no pictures were taken then that would be within their rights to do so. If the person who was taking the picture was on the street it would be a different issue. However, this person was in an area controlled by a person/body of people.

Er, no. The hotel can't say that bouncers are allowed to bodily remove someone's property from their person. Also, if there are no "rules" posted, how is a hotel guest to know?
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wittyone on June 23, 2011, 07:57:27 PM
I would think the hotel lobby belonged to the person/board of people who owned the hotel. If they gave the security personnel/body guard permission to ensure no pictures were taken then that would be within their rights to do so. If the person who was taking the picture was on the street it would be a different issue. However, this person was in an area controlled by a person/body of people.

If it was the hotel's rule that no pictures were allowed in the lobby then it would be the responsibility of the hotel and it's employees (not an outsider's security force) to enforce said rules.  The body guard didn't have the right to take the phone and delete the pictures.  If it was against hotel rules the hotel employees should have asked that no pictures be taken or that the pictures be deleted, but it wouldn't be a very enforceable rule, especially with the size and proliferation of cameras these days.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Carnation on June 24, 2011, 06:58:46 AM
Please read Caroline Kennedy's book The Right To Privacy.   Basically she says "When you're in public, anything goes."

If someone took my phone out of my hand, I'd be screaming for the police.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Twik on June 24, 2011, 07:03:44 AM
I would think the hotel lobby belonged to the person/board of people who owned the hotel. If they gave the security personnel/body guard permission to ensure no pictures were taken then that would be within their rights to do so. If the person who was taking the picture was on the street it would be a different issue. However, this person was in an area controlled by a person/body of people.


I don't think so. The hotel cannot authorize the celebrity's security to do things they are not legally entitled to do. The most the management could do is tell people not following the rules to leave.

Let's say no celebrities were involved. You take a picture of the hotel lobby, because you think it's pretty, and catch another guest walking through it. Does that person have the right to grab your camera out of your hand, and start deleting things? If the general public would be rude to do so, so are celebrities and their staff.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Delete My Account on June 24, 2011, 08:15:00 AM
I know this is a tad off-topic and varies from location, but does this law apply to upskirt photos? (i.e someone takes a picture up a woman's dress while she's going up the stairs in a public place). As far as I know, and please correct me if I'm wrong, there are currently no laws against this.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Maujer on June 24, 2011, 08:42:40 AM
I was thinking back and I know that I've been in places where I've seen someone take a picture and security has told them to delete the picture and stood next to the picture taker until they saw them do so. That would probably be a better policy, though I guess there's always a chance the photographer could refuse.

The only people I've seen actually take the camera out of the hands of the photographer to a delete a picture have been police officers.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Twik on June 24, 2011, 09:04:30 AM
I know this is a tad off-topic and varies from location, but does this law apply to upskirt photos? (i.e someone takes a picture up a woman's dress while she's going up the stairs in a public place). As far as I know, and please correct me if I'm wrong, there are currently no laws against this.

Most places now have some sort of law about taking "indecent" pictures. In which case, deleting the photos would be a bad idea, since it's destroying evidence. Although "hand it over, or I'll call the cops," would be effective, I suppose.

If there are no laws against taking a type of photo, then you can't legally demand that people delete them, unfortunately. You can ask, but I'm sure that sort of person isn't going to simply comply.

Going back to the case in point, security authorized by the hotel could ask you to delete the pictures or leave. But they can't just force people to hand over their property without proper authority.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: It's good to be Queen on June 27, 2011, 02:42:53 PM
As a Cleveland Cavaliers fan, I have a special hate for the Heat.  That being said..... It may be legal to take those pictures, but this is an etiquette board and I find it rude to take a picture of anyone without their permission.  If I were on vacation and taking a picture of say a monument, and other tourists happened to be in the picture, I wouldn't feel the need to ask their permission or find it rude, but I would not go up to a person and specifically take their picture without asking.  When I was in Williamsburg, I asked the costomed interpreters if it was OK to take their pictures.  Maybe not strictly necessary, but it seemed like the nice thing to fo.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Sabbyfrog2 on June 27, 2011, 03:18:01 PM
As a Cleveland Cavaliers fan, I have a special hate for the Heat.  That being said..... It may be legal to take those pictures, but this is an etiquette board and I find it rude to take a picture of anyone without their permission.  If I were on vacation and taking a picture of say a monument, and other tourists happened to be in the picture, I wouldn't feel the need to ask their permission or find it rude, but I would not go up to a person and specifically take their picture without asking.  When I was in Williamsburg, I asked the costomed interpreters if it was OK to take their pictures.  Maybe not strictly necessary, but it seemed like the nice thing to fo.

Re the bolded: Exactly! Just because something is legal doesn't make it any less rude.
It's completely legal for me to call someone a witch but it doesn't make it any less rude to do so.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: jimithing on June 27, 2011, 09:22:59 PM
As a Cleveland Cavaliers fan, I have a special hate for the Heat.  That being said..... It may be legal to take those pictures, but this is an etiquette board and I find it rude to take a picture of anyone without their permission.  If I were on vacation and taking a picture of say a monument, and other tourists happened to be in the picture, I wouldn't feel the need to ask their permission or find it rude, but I would not go up to a person and specifically take their picture without asking.  When I was in Williamsburg, I asked the costomed interpreters if it was OK to take their pictures.  Maybe not strictly necessary, but it seemed like the nice thing to fo.

The difference, however, is between a regular "lay" person, if you will, and a celebrity. I don't see them on equal footing. I would not get all up in a celebrity's face or be insistent on taking their picture, but I disagree that the very act of taking a celebrity's picture is rude. I guess I consider that part of the gig at times.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Everlee on June 27, 2011, 10:32:18 PM
I don't really see the OP as doing anything wrong.  She stayed in the spot she was originally in and just got her camera and snapped a picture.  As long as she isn't physically impeding the team in any way I don't feel that the bodyguard had any right to snatch her camera out of her hand.  Honestly, I don't believe anyone has a right to snatch anything from you if you're not doing anything wrong. 
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: TeamBhakta on June 27, 2011, 10:59:56 PM
The bodyguard should have asked the woman's name, taken a picture of her without her permission and then had the celebrity post it online. With the caption "This woman is Suzy Jones, at the Crescent Hotel on <whatever date>. I gather she was waiting for a job interview, when she took pictures of me after being asked not to. Hopefully the hotel will not hire someone like her. Shout out to the fans that do respect my privacy, though. You guys rock." 
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wittyone on June 27, 2011, 11:14:42 PM
The bodyguard should have asked the woman's name, taken a picture of her without her permission and then had the celebrity post it online. With the caption "This woman is Suzy Jones, at the Crescent Hotel on <whatever date>. I gather she was waiting for a job interview, when she took pictures of me after being asked not to. Hopefully the hotel will not hire someone like her. Shout out to the fans that do respect my privacy, though. You guys rock."  

Why would this be okay to do?  Would you not find this rude?  

There is no way the bodyguard or celebrities would know the OP's friend was waiting for a job interview.  The only reason we know is because the OP said so.  And while we can conjecture all we want on the wisdom of a potential employee snapping pictures of guests it would be extremely rude/detrimental to the woman's future for a celebrity to do this.  He would come off as really mean-spirited.  

As PP have said part of being a celebrity is getting your picture taken/being recognized when out in public.  Most people who pull out their cameras just want to document their brush with fame.  Some people do make money off of it, but they aren't doing anything wrong, so long as they aren't actually invading a space where privacy can reasonably be expected, such as a home, or hotel room.  Out in public is fair game.

Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Lauren on June 28, 2011, 06:12:31 AM
I grew up with women who went on to represent my country at sport and while they didn't get as many requests as men, they did occasionly have people come up and request a picture. One of my closest friends best memories is a little girl completely losing it when she met her at the supermarket.

Taking a picture of a man who is making millions of dollars to play sport is not rude. Some things come with the job.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Baxter on June 28, 2011, 07:21:33 AM
In the 1970's my teacher was on board an aeroplane with KISS and they had on no make-up (that was a big thing in the 70's before they were unmasked!).  My teacher said a lady took a photo of them and a big bodyguard got up and took the roll of film out of her camera, got her details and said he would send the shots back to her without the unmade-up KISS band one.  Pity that can't be done anymore.

Slightly off topic but does anyone have any insight into why this woman would take a photo of these people, who she didn't even know?  I do not understand the cult of celebrity and this is just another example which confuses me.  She didn't even know who they were.  I totally agree with Its good to be queen - this woman showed poor etiquette skills.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Wonderflonium on June 28, 2011, 08:17:50 AM
The bodyguard should have asked the woman's name, taken a picture of her without her permission and then had the celebrity post it online. With the caption "This woman is Suzy Jones, at the Crescent Hotel on <whatever date>. I gather she was waiting for a job interview, when she took pictures of me after being asked not to. Hopefully the hotel will not hire someone like her. Shout out to the fans that do respect my privacy, though. You guys rock." 

That didn't happen. No where in the OP did it say she was asked not to take pictures.

When you become famous, you make some tradeoffs. People are going to take pictures of you in public. In return, you get paid insane amounts of money. The woman in the OP was completely unobtrusive and did nothing wrong. The body guard was way out of line.

Slightly off topic but does anyone have any insight into why this woman would take a photo of these people, who she didn't even know?

It's quite possible that she has friends or family members who are fans and who would like to see the picture.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Carnation on June 28, 2011, 08:47:55 AM
In the 1970's my teacher was on board an aeroplane with KISS and they had on no make-up (that was a big thing in the 70's before they were unmasked!).  My teacher said a lady took a photo of them and a big bodyguard got up and took the roll of film out of her camera, got her details and said he would send the shots back to her without the unmade-up KISS band one.  Pity that can't be done anymore.

Slightly off topic but does anyone have any insight into why this woman would take a photo of these people, who she didn't even know?  I do not understand the cult of celebrity and this is just another example which confuses me.  She didn't even know who they were.  I totally agree with Its good to be queen - this woman showed poor etiquette skills.

You cannot do this legally.

Just can't. :(
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Twik on June 28, 2011, 09:22:42 AM
Slightly off topic but does anyone have any insight into why this woman would take a photo of these people, who she didn't even know?  I do not understand the cult of celebrity and this is just another example which confuses me.  She didn't even know who they were.  I totally agree with Its good to be queen - this woman showed poor etiquette skills.

 Why do people stand in line for autographs by authors, when the book will otherwise contain exactly the same words? Why do people pay bizarrely high prices for paintings by artists who are "names", when paintings that are just as appealing languish, because their creators are not well known?

There's something about saying, "I was in the presence of greatness, and here's my record of it".
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Everlee on June 28, 2011, 10:08:57 PM
Slightly off topic but does anyone have any insight into why this woman would take a photo of these people, who she didn't even know?  I do not understand the cult of celebrity and this is just another example which confuses me.  She didn't even know who they were.  I totally agree with Its good to be queen - this woman showed poor etiquette skills.

 Why do people stand in line for autographs by authors, when the book will otherwise contain exactly the same words? Why do people pay bizarrely high prices for paintings by artists who are "names", when paintings that are just as appealing languish, because their creators are not well known?

There's something about saying, "I was in the presence of greatness, and here's my record of it".

True, true.  It's just neat to say you've seen someone that other people know of.  I am a huge indie music fan, so a lot of the concerts I go crazy about are of bands no one's heard of before.  But those pictures of me and the musicians are some of my favorite things! 

My husband looveesss the Heat (seriously, there are no words for how obsessed he is), while I could care less, but I would be all excited and try to take a picture of them for him if I had the chance.
Title: Re: Miami Heat SS's??
Post by: Baxter on June 28, 2011, 11:39:08 PM
Slightly off topic but does anyone have any insight into why this woman would take a photo of these people, who she didn't even know?  I do not understand the cult of celebrity and this is just another example which confuses me.  She didn't even know who they were.  I totally agree with Its good to be queen - this woman showed poor etiquette skills.

 Why do people stand in line for autographs by authors, when the book will otherwise contain exactly the same words? Why do people pay bizarrely high prices for paintings by artists who are "names", when paintings that are just as appealing languish, because their creators are not well known?

There's something about saying, "I was in the presence of greatness, and here's my record of it".

True, true.  It's just neat to say you've seen someone that other people know of.  I am a huge indie music fan, so a lot of the concerts I go crazy about are of bands no one's heard of before.  But those pictures of me and the musicians are some of my favorite things!  

My husband looveesss the Heat (seriously, there are no words for how obsessed he is), while I could care less, but I would be all excited and try to take a picture of them for him if I had the chance.

Thank-you Twik and Everlee for your replies to my question - I completely understand what you are saying and I get it now.  I could see myself going crazy meeting Einstein (though I think my chance may be nil :) ) or Monet (also nil), I just wasn't thinking of them as celebrities as such, but greatness yes.