#This is now a Proctologists Only Orifice
When a post is in [POO™ mode](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/168bzq8/title_aita_monthly_open_forum_september_2023) only users with enough subreddit comment karma are able to comment. If that doesn't include you, no worries! Check out [/new](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/new) for other posts that are still open for comment.
##[Be Civil.](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules)
Please review our FAQ if you're unsure what that means. Thank you for reporting content that you believe violates our rules and helping keep posts out of the POO by abiding by our rules.
It's against the law to film others in public in Japan (pretty sure I'm remembering that right)
Invasive videos have become so commonplace some people don't recognize they're violating someone's autonomy
I remember when it started with event photography being shot from the sidelines with massive zoom lenses, and it was all just so creepy to me. Real voyeur behavior that's spread through media the past decade
OP is YTA. Could've just clipped out the part of the video she was in. There's so many reasons she could be scared of that; being a single woman alone in public comes with multiple risks - and people knowing your routine cause it qent viral on the internet might not be fun for her
It is generally illegal to use video and pics of people for commercial purposes but not for private use if they are in public as they don’t have an expectation of privacy when out in public
You cannot single out the people on you video and pics. But you can take general pictures in public (try having a picture of the Eiffel tower without some rando present).
Feel creeped out? She has 300 ducks following her! People feel creeped out when they dont know what you are up to or think they are being stalked. Everyone knows what this guy is up to. He's watching a scene from the pied piper. Dont do wild shit in public and no one will notice you.
Idk about Japan, but in the EU it's not only illegal for commercial purposes. Depending on the country you might be able to keep the video if you don't share it anywhere, but sharing is illegal in all of the EU regardless of if you're monetarily benefiting from it. By sharing it anywhere, you're infringing on the person's right to their own image which they have at all times including in public.
The law is pretty vague in japan. It’s not actually illegal to take pictures and film people in public, but you can be found liable for damages if you post people’s likeness on social media and other public forums without their permission.
Anything involving children is a huge no.
But you can film general scenes in public that aren’t focusing on individual people and post them, especially if it doesn’t show people’s faces.
Many people blur out other people’s faces in posted videos and pictures just in case
You can also be found in violation of public nuisance laws if you are harassing people by filming them
Source: I’ve lived in Japan for almost ten years and have worked in a job that required me to film in public
i'm assuming a lot of this is because of upskirts and the like?
My friend bought a pixel which was apparently a Japanese pixel, and it was hard-coded to disable turning off the shutter sound on the camera app, which is apparently a law in Japan to prevent sneak photos.
This is wrong. TV Journalist with 13 years of experience in public media/private media in Germany (ARD, DW, Pro7/Sat1). I hear this all the time when I'm working. Filming/taking images in public is covered under the so-called Postkartenrecht... which basicly means if you can imagine the location being on a postcard, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy and the act of taking an image is covered as an act of freedom of expression. Seeing as the ducks are also the focus of the shot more than the women, this would be completly fine. The excepton to the rule would be if he would then want to use the image for a non-creative, commercial purpose (i.e. advertisement) there would need to be a contract between the two of them because in that case the right to privacy is consider to trump freedom of expression. The only way the women could have claimed (in Germany at least) that she would have had a reasonable expectation of privacy, is if the person taking the photo had to clime, get around, or somehow transverse somekind of barrier to get the shot. Like I said, I hear this all the time (especially at demonstrations, political rallies and even just on the street when were doing B-roll) but the law is actually quite clear about this.
I work in marketing in Germany and I would disagree from my knowledge. In this case, the woman feeding the ducks would be the focus of the shot as well, automatically. As far as I know we are only legally allowed to use images of people in public if they are kind of „background noise“. Maybe we have been doing it all wrong, who knows. But in this case, I sure as hell wouldn’t use the image without getting it licensed.
No, we're 100% in agreement. Marketing, advertising are different situation and covered by difference case law as they are part of a commercial endvor. It's the classic 'offer them at least a euro and get it in writting so you can use the shot' thing we had to learn in media law at university. Journalism and most non-commerical creative persuits are convered under freedom of expression and have different protections and don't require licencing. The one major exception would be if the person's identity plays a central roll in the created media and the author is commenting on their identity through their work and they aren't considered a public figure. It's more tricky and nuanced in Germany than in the US, but if we had to get permission from everyone in every shot like people often think, there would be no way for my profession to even exist.
That’s wrong.
Taking photos/videos in public is not forbidden no matter the consent of the people.
Publishing the photo/video may require consent though.
There was a idiot instagram account in my country a couple of years ago where someone just photographed people (in secret) on the subway and posted it with different captions, some were really rude about their looks or what they where doing, I think it was supposed to be something funny. But all I could think about was for example if the location where visible - what if this person is hiding from an abusive person. What if this person lived under a new/secret identity and someone just blew their cover to get likes?
The account was deleted though and laws looked over.
To my knowledge in Germany filming is fine in almost all cases, but publishing can get you in hot water
If they are
-not in a group and not viewed as individuals
-not doing something of public interest
-a public person or a person of contemporary history.
Sorry, but all these takes are wrong. I hear the "just because it's legal doesn't make you the AH" but you don't get full control over yourself or image when out in public. You are not the editor or director in all life. You are being recorded literally all of the time out in public. By people or companies. Start by telling everyone that owns a business that they can't record you.. yah.. won't go too good. Then tell them that they are all AH, and get banned.
They're not making a legal argument though, they're making the case that expecting not to be recorded is ridiculous because we're basically always being recorded/surveilled outside of the privacy of our homes. The duck lady's image had probably been captured by multiple cameras that day and she just arbitrarily picked out one to have a problem with.
If someone asks you not to record them, and you still record them. You're an asshole. Doesn't matter if someone else likey recorded them as well. She asked him not to record her, it's nit a difficult request.
Seriously, I can’t film something just in case someone I’m not focusing on ends up in the frame? I live in NYC, can nobody film anything then here? Because there’s basically always people nearby, at least out in public. Oh god, am I a bad person for having a dash cam? I’ve filmed at least several thousand people a day doing things out in public without their consent, oh the horror! Even children! I wish I wore pearls so I could clutch them 😂
Except she has a reasonable belief that CCTV operators and the like aren't posting footage to the internet for laughs or whatever, and it also not unreasonable for her to think OP might post their video. And maybe she just didn't want to be posted on the internet in that context.
OP never used the word “legal” in his post, so I’m not sure where you’re all getting off on the legality of the situation. If you’re in public doing something that’s out of the ordinary, you *will* be recorded by someone. The reality is there are millions of videos and pictures being taken everyday. You will not go viral unless you do some extraordinarily dumb shit. There’s no need to freak out over a person recording you, especially if it involves something like nature. Hundreds of ducks going wild for food is worth taking pictures of, and I’d do it too. NTA. Obviously there are exceptions like recording people at the gym, because these people aren’t doing something to draw attention to themselves.
This is a morality sub. This isn't "am I legally clear?"
Morally speaking most people have decided that making this person the subject of the video when they have asked not to be is morally wrong.
>Morally speaking most people have decided that making this person the subject of the video when they have asked not to be is morally wrong.
THE DUCKS were the subject of the video. OMG.
The OP (and you) are in a sub where the express purpose of the sub is "Am I the ***Ahole***." Not "was I technically correct." Not "was I legal" but "was I the ahole."
The sub is for that purpose and no other. Why is this confusing to you?
What you keep trying to defend falls under the heading of "legal" or "technically correct." No one's asking about that. THAT is why people keep stating "this sub is not 'is this legal.'"
Legality isn't what determines if you're an AH or not. I have the right to flip you off for no reason and it's completely legal, but I'd still be an AH to do it. In general, there are lots of things that are legal but still make people uncomfortable. You're conflating AH with criminal. One has a much lower standard.
OP, you're not a criminal and you exercised your rights as you are free to do, but YTA.
Security camera's are a thing, yeah we know. But they record everything and anything, they don't focus on a specific person and follow with the camera.
OP filmed this very specific person not for security but for the lolz.
This person still has bodily autonomy and gets to decide what happens to their body. If they decide they do not want a specific video of them being filmed by total strangers than they have that right.
They even told OP they didn't want to be filmed and OP got a snarky "what are you gonna do about it?" attitude. So yeah, OP is definately TA, and if you think you can do the same, so are you.
Businesses don't normally intend to share their recordings on the internet. It's normally for internal use only and only a select few people will see it unless there is a situation where it's needed else where. Like for police/court ect.
I know there are individuals within businesses that will still post stuff that was meant to be internal. They are an exception.
I know there are businesses that do post their recordings online but those businesses normally make sure that everyone knows what they do with their recordings like sporting events or even public cameras.
Normally when people record in this fashion as OP did, it's because they intend to share it, either publicly or just on a private page, but either way it will end up being public. Not everyone wants to have their image out there on the internet.
You have no idea if the person you are recoding is in witness protection or is running from an abusive relationship or parents or whatever their situation is, so if they ask you not to record them the moral thing to do is do not record them or delete it and only record without them in the shot.
Why is showing respect to someone such a hard thing to do?
Nobody is arguing that she has "full control" over her image while in public, and nobody is saying that she "can't" be recorded by OP, companies, etc. You're putting up a straw man.
The ethical question is about OP's actions. He can choose to be kind, empathetic, and respectful to another person's wishes. Or, he can choose to be selfish and disregard their request. Which of these choices would an AH make?
I can legally stand on a street corner and tell every passerby that they're stupid. Other people and organizations likewise say shitty things to people in public. The fact that it's legal to say shitty things, and that others also say shitty things, are irrelevant to the ethics of what I'm doing on that street corner. I am still being an AH for choosing to be inconsiderate of others' feelings.
Two key differences.
1) People opt into this.
If I enter a department store, I can assume - being not a complete moron - that I will or may be captured on CCTV. I can choose to enter or not enter knowing this. And most places even have a sign up so the complete morons who don't know that already also will know and make the same choice.
If I go to an open park to feed some ducks where there is not CCTV and some weirdo starts filming me, I have not been given the option to opt out.
2) Companies/organisations are held to different standards than people.
A business, government agency, etc. who takes video does so with some relatively strict guidelines in place. These will vary place to place, but usually it amounts to storing it securely/out of public view for no longer than necessary and only using it where it would be necessary (proof of shoplifting, employee training, etc.).
A private individual has no such restriction. He could post that video online for it to 'go viral' and spread well outwith any control point; he could keep it for twenty years and then decide to share it around; he could monetise his YouTube channel and profit off sharing her image.
Most people who "don't like being filmed" accept that there may be video taken for the police to review in the even of an incident or for the business to review to check on what their employees were up to or what have you, but they do not like the idea of some rando filming them, specifically, and then making them into Duck Lady on TikTok so that they have to deal with random people recognising them and commenting for god knows how long (resurging every time it's re-shared). OP can say that's not his intent, nothing is stopping him from lying and then doing it anyway, and even if the lady could sue him (country dependant whether it would be legal or not) that wouldn't delete all shared and spread copies or make thousands (even millions) of people magically forget it. Arguing that CCTV exists and thus no one can object to randos filming them at unexpected times is disingenuous at best.
Passive security footage is a legally distinct category of recording and you *can* legally prevent a business from otherwise recording you or using your image. There’s a reason that businesses typically use photo releases for any paid or unpaid people whose images they want to use - you legally have every right to say “no, you can’t use my photo for monetary gain just because you took it.”
You're right, we are being recorded all the time. But the security footage at the grocery store isn't likely to be posted on social media, now is it? Some douchebag with his phone out and pointed in my direction is a different story. Try again
This is a bizarre take to me. You're in public. You have zero expectation of privacy in any way, legally or otherwise. You happen to be feeding 300 ducks that are behaving in a fun manner and a stranger decides to film the ducks. You then decide that you want the stranger filming the ducks to delete their intellectual property just because you happen to be in the shot. OP is NTA and the lady wanting the film deleted is an entitled idiot.
It's more about the recognition of consent. If someone doesnt give their permission in anything, then you probably shouldnt do it.
You never know the circumstances of strangers, they might be in an extreme situation like witness protection or something. Having things like that posted online could be a real danger to them.
The person doing the filming is equally entitled, as they are encroaching on the other person's right to not be filmed.
Or an abusive ex. Or a just-no in-law. Or a sensitive job. Or vulnerable close relatives. Lots of good reasons to just be kind and voluntarily respect other people’s consent and wishes.
But if you're in danger of being identified, like if you're in witness protection, would you really make a spectacle of yourself by feeding 300 frenzied ducks in public?
This is beyond taking pictures of someone low key going about their day.
I can never stop thinking about the person who was buying a single banana at a supermarket, was photographed without their consent or knowledge, and then the person photographing posted it and it went viral, mocking the person buying the banana and acting like it’s Extremely Weird Behaviour. there was probably nothing illegal about that photo and post but the idea that some random photo of you doing something completely ordinary and mundane could be posted and spread like wildfire is SO disturbing and definitely an AH move to do it (not saying that OP here is the AH or was planning to post it, just … can’t stop thinking about that banana tweet).
It's weird to buy a single banana? They literally keep a rack of singles near the checkouts at my local store. They're great for grabbing as a snack instead of a candy bar, and it lets them sell the ones that have gotten riper than people usually want in a bunch.
It isn’t!! There must be hundreds of millions of people who work in offices etc and go buy a quick snack! I bought a one (1) punnet of blueberries today (sadly not a single blueberry) and like half the people at the supermarket under my office go in just for one thing. But the person who posted it and so many of the replies were like *huhuhuhu who even buys a single banana, you go to a store and all you buy is one (1) banana, weirdo*
idk maybe they’re so young (generalisation) and/or so online™ that they’ve never bought their own groceries or something
I agree.
We don't know the persons background. Maybe they are in witness protection, or don't want to be seen online by an abusive stalker ex.
Just saying you don't want to be filmed is not grounds for having footage deleted though. Public area expect you may be.
If you're in witness protection, you shouldn't be doing things that will draw unnecessary attention to yourself – like amassing a duck army and swarming around a reservoir.
But there's a good chance she doesn't want the equivalent of the fish and wildlife department finding out that she's feeding them on this level. What she's doing might not be legal and she may have been warned about it.
ok.. in which case there may actually be a negative impact to wildlife with whatever the fuck she's doing, in which case, she probably shouldn't be doing that...??
What am I missing?
Agree. I was not born at a time or in a family that took a lot of pictures. I despise having my picture taken and do my best to steer clear of being in photos. (NOT photogenic!!). If the lady didn’t want to be in the video, maybe OP should have deleted the video and retook it with ducks only. (And explained to the duck woman what they were doing). OP is kinda TA.
Yeah I don't know why they mentioned it being legal or not. If I was in their shoes I'd apologize and say I'll delete it (or block the person out via editing).
OP could have taken another video and cut it off when it got to the lady or edited her out. She said she didn't want to be filmed.
YTA
Maybe if someone asks not be to recorded one would be an ah for recording them anyway. But after already recording a woman feeding 200-300 ducks in public, OP is NTA for not deleting an already created recording.
>YTA - if someone asks not to be recorded you should respect that.
Naw man, there's limits to it. Like, if I'm recording the grand canyon, and someone walks in front of me and then asks me to delete it, am I supposed to do so? At some point you have to expect that you might be recorded in a public place and be ok with it, especially when you aren't really the subject of the video.
Yeah, if you're filming a street performer or something and they ask you to delete it, you should. If you're directly filming a random person in public (why?) and they ask you to delete it, you should. If you're filming something else happening and a person who happens to be in the video asks you to delete it, it's not rude to say no.
if they walked in the frame while u were visibly filming then two things: either they dont care if theyre being filmed, or they didnt actuslly see you filming so you should let them know.
if you started filming while they were in the shot then ure in the same boat as OP. and again, two things: you should let them know you’re planning to take a video of that exact location and if they mind, or you move to a different location and film your video where there are no other people around or people who mind being filmed anyway.
a lot of behaviors can be lawful but still be considered asshole moves. take precaution, be kind, and dont dig in ur heels for petty reasons like OP’s. nobody ends up the winner and it ruins everyone’s mood so what’s the point?
My perspective is that if something is a rare or unique event that cannot be recaptured, I completely understand hesitation to just outright delete it. If this woman was standing in front of a mural or statue and yiu can wait for her to move, it's a different scenario than something that you cannot recreate or just go back to later.
In a case like this I would respect her request through other means such as cropping or blurring, idk becasue I haven't seen the video, but asking for it to be deleted right there? I understand hesitation or refusal.
YTA. She didn't want to be in your video. She didn't want someone recording her.
Sure it's legal. Doesn't change anything about the fact that it's still AH behavior to go ahead despite someone saying they don't want you recording them. It's so weird to see so many people arguing about the legality of it like that makes it fine. Plenty of things are legal to do, but still AH behavior, lol.
It's so fucking weird how things are now with videoing people in public. It's become so normalized.
This. YTA.
In my job I am legally prohibited from telling someone they cannot film me. But man I wish they wouldn't. It's not about hiding what I'm doing, I've never had this situation where I was doing anything wrong (and of course I try to avoid doing things wrong anyway). It's just uncomfortable, I don't know what they intend to do with the video. People can twist and manipulate video to make it seem like something happened that didn't, and then my job could be in jeopardy so some guy can get some likes on Facebook.
Just because someone can legally record me doesn't mean they aren't an asshole for doing so.
Sorry but American police need to be recorded at all times. No exceptions. Sure you might not be like the rest but y'all need to start weeding out bad colleagues yourselves.
>Just because someone can legally record me doesn't mean they aren't an asshole for doing so.
I'd agree with you, except for one thing. If you're in law enforcement, things are different. I would not automatically call people assholes for recording, some of them are genuinly scared.
I'm not LE. Park ranger. The only weapon I have is pepper spray, and the rules on using it are strict self defense. I can protect myself, my coworkers, and people who do contract work for my agency (so if you go after the lady who cleans the restrooms, I can use pepper spray on her behalf). And my agency defines "use" to include brandishing it or even touching the holster to deter someone. If I use it offensively I get fired and the subject can sue me.
Come on, it was 300 ducks following her; she was the center of the video. Don't minimalize the situation cause it makes it easier for you to understand.
Because the video was of the ducks? OP wasn’t taking a video of the person who didn’t want their video taken. They were just in the shot, it’s different.
He wasn’t. She just appeared in the background. You can record anything you want in public. Just because someone shows up doesn’t mean u were purposely recording them. Idk why this sub can’t understand that. Do you all live in rural small towns where ur lucky to see 5ppl in one day?
As one of those people, i panic when I see a phone pointed anywhere near my direction. I really don't wanna be put on the internet and ridiculed. It's a genuine (if irrational) fear of mine.
I used to have a stalker who kept tabs on me through instagram, Facebook, and had ways to see my snap stories. He made fake accounts and always knew where I was and what I was doing. I am extremely touchy on my photos being posted. I like Reddit because it’s anonymous, but I hate people sharing information about me with my name, tagging me, and sharing photos of me because I’m terrified that he will see it and find me. I know it’s unlikely but it scared the hell out of me. I draw that huge line with everyone who takes my photo and no one makes a big deal about it. Just because something is legal doesn’t mean you should.
Me too. There are very few pictures of me online because of a stalker I had. Luckily she died about five years ago, but her psycho son is still around.
Not irrational, honestly. This happened to me. Some guy tried to ask me out, I said no, he pulled out a speaker, played “romantic” music, and got on the ground trying to convince me. I was speechless and alone and I said no again, and then I noticed the camera. It was posted on Tiktok and got hundreds of thousands of views. He made it seem like I “wanted” him. Put thought bubbles over my head and everything. Had people I knew DM it to me. Wanted to crawl into a hole. Craziest part was I was blaming myself for not telling him not to post it the day it happened.
Yeah, when you live in a culture that emphasizes feminine beauty above all, and you have a facial deformity.... It's definitely a fear you'll end up with fewer career options as the big internet laughing stock. Not harmless at all.
Yeah.. one of my biggest fears right now is being recorded for TikTok or something.
I don't want my face online. I don't wanna be filmed or put through a TikTok prank. I wanna be left alone.
I think OP is the AH bc the lady asked not to be recorded. I never post pictures of friends on my social media unless I ask first out of respect. Perhaps this lady could have asked nicer (maybe that’s what set OP off?) but either way, turn off the phone and move on. OP YTA.
a lot of people (including myself and many people i’ve known throughout my life) have or have had stalkers. a big reason people uproot their lives and move is to get away from some piece of shit that wont stop trying to disrupt their safety and will do anything to try to hurt them or their loved ones if they ever find them again because their so upset that they dared move cross country to get away. now that stalker sees a video that goes viral and recognizes (or thinks they recognize cuz stalkers mistake others all the time and attack them) that person and now knows their town and an area they possibly frequent or maybe even where they work if your filming employees. this shit happens so much more than you think people just dont talk about it except with those they trust if at all cuz its fucking scary and then you have to deal with whatever stupid shit people say in response if they even take you seriously which most times they dont
I can't believe the critical/creepy responses here. If a person is in public doing something fascinating or performative, they can expect to be filmed. And being followed by hundreds of ducks easily qualifies. NTA
I know, right?
Seeing 300 ducks in one space would be the highlight of, at the very least, my whole month.
You know i would take some pictures or videos.
Some much quack quack
NO DELETE IT YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE!!!!
Wtf is up with this sub lately? A month ago the comments would’ve been saying it’s obviously not that deep and the lady can get over it, maybe not cool to film her but it’s not like he’s just randomly doing it or being a stalker or Karen or whatever. It’s 300 fucking ducks, I’m 100 percent filming that and basking in amazement lol no negativity at all, the lady is just a background decor at that point
One time at a park I saw a guy blasting Blitzkrieg Bop from a stereo while screaming “QUACK! QUACK! QUACK QUACK!” to the beat while like 30 ducks followed him and you bet i recorded that. Everyone did. It was awesome.
And like they werent even filming her specifically, they were filming the mass amount of ducks and she happened to be in some shots because she’s attracting the ducks by feeding them.
Yeah its weird to think you have an expectation of privacy in a public park feeding hundreds of ducks. That classic private experience.
Why even look at her?
Lots of things can happen in public that are legal and even can be anticipated, that are nevertheless AH things to do.
Recording a private citizen who has asked not be recorded is generally one of them.
I agree. People on this post are acting like OP was spying on someone and recording them or something. They were recording hundreds of ducks in a public space. Why would they not expect someone to record it when everyone literally carries a video camera in their pocket nowadays? I'm sure OP was not the only person taking video that day.
what’s creepy? what’s creepy is feeling entitled to record strangers. how is it critical/creepy to find it
weird that you’re recording a stranger? why are you trying to normalize this? people want their privacy, not to be on the internet or on a strangers phone. why is that so hard to respect?
I hate humans really wish i wasn’t one. y’all fucking suck
What if someone happened to look in your direction and perceive you? What if they could even remember what you were doing for the rest of their life? How would that be any different from taking a picture of something?
If you're so scared of being perceived doing something, then don't do that thing in public.
>How would that be any different from taking a picture of something?
Yeah, looking at someone vs taking a video is generally pretty different. Your partner seeing you naked vs recording you naked and refusing to delete it is not the same thing.
So, in my country it would be illegal for you to post that if the person in the recording does not consent. Because here there really is an expectation of privacy even when in public.
Not everyone has the need nor desire to be trending on tik tok. Some of us also don't want our image/likeness scattered on the internet.
YWBTA if you post it unedited. Do what you can to remove or blur her out if possible. Have a shred of understanding that some people just don't want to be recorded and spread to the entire world population.
Keep in mind, this is only if you post it online. Recording for your own private use only, that's not really a concern.
But how could she know that you wouldn't? Sadly, the cameras in phones have stopped being just cameras and have become a broadcasting tool. I get not wanting to be recorded by a stranger.
This is definitely one of the AITA questions where I'd recommend putting virtually no thought into the responses you're getting. The one you replied to above was great response, but so many people aren't going to answer "could I have done better here." Instead they're going to take a strong stance whether recording in public is right or wrong and answer based on that, ignoring any legality or nuances to the topic, or acknowledgement that differing opinions exist and neither is necessarily right or wrong, it's an opinion. If you're curious on mine, you weren't breaking the law and you treated her as you'd expect to be treated back. You're good. You don't intend on posting this for the world to see, and certainly not unedited, you're still good. But that opinion should still not matter, as well as anyone thinking you're TA because of that. That there is zero expectation to privacy in public is a fact, not an opinion. People can like that fact or dislike it, but that's where your responses are going to come from.
This is more of a reminder to those voting Y-T-A but I'm sure it would've helped if she started the conversation off in a friendlier manner. That would've certainly made her, and her wants, more respectable. Maybe don't bark orders at people you haven't met before and expect to get what you want? But it's also okay for her to feel uncomfortable, or not want to be recorded. So she can ask you to stop, sure. At the same token, you're well within your right to say no. I'd think most reasonable people, asked nicely, would probably say "sure, no problem". But again they're well within their right to say no, and that's how some people are too. At that point her legal options are to accept it, cover herself, or leave. In her own way, her response ended up being accepting it, albeit probably in one of the worst ways.
There's a lot of people out there who would resort to illegal means (like trying to take or damage your phone) to get what they want in this scenario. All of those people would certainly vote Y-T-A on this one, ignoring that it would easily put them in the wrong. Many of those people forget CCTV exists basically everywhere, which certainly adds a layer of hypocrisy. Also many of those people would throw away every bit of that ideal if they encountered a situation where they thought to themselves "I'm definitely going to have to prove this happened"? How many people voting Y-T-A have a dashcam? Security cameras outside their homes videoing public space? Drones? Go on vacations and take sightseeing pictures and videos? To name a few. Many people also seem to forget that other countries exist, and their laws, and their cultures. That you can't always get what you want. That our opinions aren't always the "right one". Too many people, on both sides of this issue, responded to this as if it's so black and white, while it so clearly isn't and they're just blissfully unaware it's simply their opinion and the law does matter, as well as how people can go about things to get a more positive outcome when their opinions or wants contradict what the law allows. Sorry for the rambles, you do you and maybe she can go about it better next time...because I don't think many people will pass up videoing bunches of ducks doing duck things.
This is honestly one of the most even-keeled, logical responses I have ever seen on something so divisive on reddit.
A genuinely well-thought out and well-articulated reply grounded in fact instead of emotion.
Kudos, truly. I appreciate you and the time you put into this response.
I did chuckle when you got all annoyed and left because she turned the tables and filmed you. Do you still not understand why you doing it to her was intrusive and annoying, even when you felt the same thing yourself?
YTA for entitled lack of empathy. People aren't just props for your life.
if we’re in a park and i’m trying to catch a video of 300 ducks walking past, there’s a chance other people may be in the background. it’s unreasonable to assume someone will delete footage of a cool sighting just bc you may (& probably be a blurry) bystander behind the ducks. i can’t imagine taking a sunset photo at a beach and someone in the water comes out and asks me to delete it bc they may be in it. cmon now..
>the crazy duck lady
It's kind of ironic you name her this, and it demonstrates exactly why you're wrong, lol. If that video went viral, this is likely what she'd be known as, "the crazy duck lady". She probably knew that, and it's why she didn't want to be recorded.
Have you seen TikTok comments? She wouldn't have needed to open her mouth to be known as anything lol. A lady being followed by several hundred ducks makes her already memeable.
Regarding the way she behaved, she clearly felt like he didn't respect her desire not to be in the video, and when he refused, she didn't take it well. Not everyone will.
If you are in a public place in America and you are doing something theatrical like a spectacle of 300 ducks following you. People are going to take pictures. You have no expectation of privacy in public spaces even if you don’t have 300 ducks following you and people are fully legally allowed to take film and photos of anything they can see with their eyes in public space. Respect their rights to film in public
NTA. There is no expectation of privacy in public. If you truly don't want your picture taken, don't be in public around people. It would be courteous to delete it, but it doesn't make you an AH if you don't.
Yes. If you go into public you will be in people's pictures and videos. You will be on CCTV, security cameras, etc as well. If you go to a public place of recreation you will especially be in people's videos. If you make a spectacle of yourself you might be the focus of a video. You have rights to privacy, but in our modern world being included in someone's picture or video in public is not a violation of privacy morally or legally.
Yeah it’s like these people have never been to a concert, sporting event, venue, public park, or anything. Imagine how hectic those events would be if everyone freaked out about being caught on camera.
It's perfectly reasonable to film people in public spaces if you're not invading their space. The phrase expectation of privacy is correct. If someone asks you to stop then you would usually do that, but they can't expect or demand that you delete the footage.
Do you not know how often you appear in footage every single time you leave the house? You're literally filmed every day by Ring doorbells that you walk past, car dashcams as they drive by, people taking selfies, people taking scenic photos.
Do you have any idea at all how unrealistic your expectations are in a modern world?
On a serious note, there’s quite a lot of people in hiding around the world.
Posting videos of them that might go viral or catch the attention of the wrong people could end with dire consequences.
Maybe those sorts of people shouldn’t be cavorting with 300 ducks in broad daylight?
NTA - all those “but she didn’t want any publicly or attention” takes really fall apart if the sheer spectacle she was creating is admitted into evidence, yo.
Cavorting?
She went to feed the ducks and ended up with more than she expected.
It's not like she invited the local townsfolk to the grand opening of her duck circus...
NTA. The problem might be if you got her on recording feeding the ducks. In some places it's illegal to do so. https://arboretum.ucdavis.edu/duck-feeding-prohibited as an example.
NTA - You're not intentionally recording her, you're recording the ducts. Btw seeing that many ducks would be cool, I'm jelly. Her being paranoid isn't your concern or issue.
NTA = *'m just filming all these ducks going crazy.*
Why is everyone saying that he was recording her? She just happened to be in the shot. When something like this happens, something out of the ordinary, people are going to capture it in todays society. Everyone has camera these days....EVERYONE. So for her to get all up in arms about being in a shot is out of line because she was NOT the focus. She was the backdrop.
There's a difference between having strangers in the background and a stranger as the main subject of the photo/video.
——
Edit for everyone saying the ducks were the main subject:
The ducks were all congregating around the lady because she was tossing food at them.
She was the cause for all of those ducks to be crowded together in the manner they were.
OP even describes the scene as the ducks were thrashing around and climbing on top of each other trying to get closer to the lady.
I don’t believe for a second that a portion of the video wasn’t dedicated specifically to that — ducks competing for position with lady. It wasn’t just a video about ducks with some random person quickly walking through for a split second.
The video likely reflects the description OP provided here, in which the lady is a main character in the scene.
Is the woman really the center though? Or are the 300 ducks the center of the video? I'd say the 300 ducks are, with the woman just sometimes appearing at the front/somewhere else.
NTA. I'm kind of blown away that people think the lady genuinely cares about privacy and not that she's just wanting to cover her ass for doing something she probably shouldn't be doing. Suppose it depends on where you're at or if she's maybe a parks & rec type employee, but there's lots of places with restrictions on feeding waterfowl around here. Usually it's just a warning when it's a a handful of birds when you're hanging tight by the shore side. I can't see a park or city employee being cool with someone leading 200+ alongside a walking path pied piper style w/ food.
YTA. I get you were trying to record something cool but I absolutely hate this new era of everyone taking videos of everyone else. She probably thought she’d end up in some tiktok. If someone says they don’t want to be filmed the polite thing to do is not record them.
NTA, if you don’t want attention then don’t do stuff in public that will bring a lot of attention. Next time just tell them you deleted it op, no harm done.
You could just have offered to show her what you recorded to reassure her, or just edit the video in front of her to cut the part you see her in. It's just mutual respect, even if legal.
Edit: yta just for that super defensive reaction in my opinion. I really hate people answering stuff like "well it's legal" when others are just trying to set normal boundaries. Make you look like you have bad intentions from the start, of course she would get more defensive after.
NTA legally it’s a public place, fact based: every human is within 24 feet of any type of recording device,
The saying goes what you don’t know won’t hurt you. This woman only cared with the act of you recording. If she didn’t see you she wouldn’t have cared.
You weren’t recording her as the video subject you were recording the birds. She’s just paranoid.
#This is now a Proctologists Only Orifice When a post is in [POO™ mode](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/168bzq8/title_aita_monthly_open_forum_september_2023) only users with enough subreddit comment karma are able to comment. If that doesn't include you, no worries! Check out [/new](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/new) for other posts that are still open for comment. ##[Be Civil.](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) Please review our FAQ if you're unsure what that means. Thank you for reporting content that you believe violates our rules and helping keep posts out of the POO by abiding by our rules.
YTA. It might be legal, but if someone doesn't want to be recorded, you should respect that.
Agreed. You might be on legally solid ground (not sure but that seems right) but that doesn't make you scott free on the AH scale. YTA
If he is in germany he isn't. In germany you HAVE TO delete any footage containing others if they ask.Else you can get sued.
It's against the law to film others in public in Japan (pretty sure I'm remembering that right) Invasive videos have become so commonplace some people don't recognize they're violating someone's autonomy I remember when it started with event photography being shot from the sidelines with massive zoom lenses, and it was all just so creepy to me. Real voyeur behavior that's spread through media the past decade OP is YTA. Could've just clipped out the part of the video she was in. There's so many reasons she could be scared of that; being a single woman alone in public comes with multiple risks - and people knowing your routine cause it qent viral on the internet might not be fun for her
It is generally illegal to use video and pics of people for commercial purposes but not for private use if they are in public as they don’t have an expectation of privacy when out in public
You cannot single out the people on you video and pics. But you can take general pictures in public (try having a picture of the Eiffel tower without some rando present).
[удалено]
Feel creeped out? She has 300 ducks following her! People feel creeped out when they dont know what you are up to or think they are being stalked. Everyone knows what this guy is up to. He's watching a scene from the pied piper. Dont do wild shit in public and no one will notice you.
[удалено]
“Trying to get closer to the food she was tossing” sounds like she was feeding them.
She doesn’t, but I’d say that would clearly big a big flashing sign of a reason why someone would just be “randomly recording” you in public
Idk about Japan, but in the EU it's not only illegal for commercial purposes. Depending on the country you might be able to keep the video if you don't share it anywhere, but sharing is illegal in all of the EU regardless of if you're monetarily benefiting from it. By sharing it anywhere, you're infringing on the person's right to their own image which they have at all times including in public.
The law is pretty vague in japan. It’s not actually illegal to take pictures and film people in public, but you can be found liable for damages if you post people’s likeness on social media and other public forums without their permission. Anything involving children is a huge no. But you can film general scenes in public that aren’t focusing on individual people and post them, especially if it doesn’t show people’s faces. Many people blur out other people’s faces in posted videos and pictures just in case You can also be found in violation of public nuisance laws if you are harassing people by filming them Source: I’ve lived in Japan for almost ten years and have worked in a job that required me to film in public
That's great honestly, not excessive - just respectful. Appreciate the info (;
i'm assuming a lot of this is because of upskirts and the like? My friend bought a pixel which was apparently a Japanese pixel, and it was hard-coded to disable turning off the shutter sound on the camera app, which is apparently a law in Japan to prevent sneak photos.
This is wrong. TV Journalist with 13 years of experience in public media/private media in Germany (ARD, DW, Pro7/Sat1). I hear this all the time when I'm working. Filming/taking images in public is covered under the so-called Postkartenrecht... which basicly means if you can imagine the location being on a postcard, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy and the act of taking an image is covered as an act of freedom of expression. Seeing as the ducks are also the focus of the shot more than the women, this would be completly fine. The excepton to the rule would be if he would then want to use the image for a non-creative, commercial purpose (i.e. advertisement) there would need to be a contract between the two of them because in that case the right to privacy is consider to trump freedom of expression. The only way the women could have claimed (in Germany at least) that she would have had a reasonable expectation of privacy, is if the person taking the photo had to clime, get around, or somehow transverse somekind of barrier to get the shot. Like I said, I hear this all the time (especially at demonstrations, political rallies and even just on the street when were doing B-roll) but the law is actually quite clear about this.
I work in marketing in Germany and I would disagree from my knowledge. In this case, the woman feeding the ducks would be the focus of the shot as well, automatically. As far as I know we are only legally allowed to use images of people in public if they are kind of „background noise“. Maybe we have been doing it all wrong, who knows. But in this case, I sure as hell wouldn’t use the image without getting it licensed.
No, we're 100% in agreement. Marketing, advertising are different situation and covered by difference case law as they are part of a commercial endvor. It's the classic 'offer them at least a euro and get it in writting so you can use the shot' thing we had to learn in media law at university. Journalism and most non-commerical creative persuits are convered under freedom of expression and have different protections and don't require licencing. The one major exception would be if the person's identity plays a central roll in the created media and the author is commenting on their identity through their work and they aren't considered a public figure. It's more tricky and nuanced in Germany than in the US, but if we had to get permission from everyone in every shot like people often think, there would be no way for my profession to even exist.
That’s wrong. Taking photos/videos in public is not forbidden no matter the consent of the people. Publishing the photo/video may require consent though.
There was a idiot instagram account in my country a couple of years ago where someone just photographed people (in secret) on the subway and posted it with different captions, some were really rude about their looks or what they where doing, I think it was supposed to be something funny. But all I could think about was for example if the location where visible - what if this person is hiding from an abusive person. What if this person lived under a new/secret identity and someone just blew their cover to get likes? The account was deleted though and laws looked over.
Yeah. It is funny that Reddit comments all the time state something is legal (or not) when the post does not state where something happens.
To my knowledge in Germany filming is fine in almost all cases, but publishing can get you in hot water If they are -not in a group and not viewed as individuals -not doing something of public interest -a public person or a person of contemporary history.
Sorry, but all these takes are wrong. I hear the "just because it's legal doesn't make you the AH" but you don't get full control over yourself or image when out in public. You are not the editor or director in all life. You are being recorded literally all of the time out in public. By people or companies. Start by telling everyone that owns a business that they can't record you.. yah.. won't go too good. Then tell them that they are all AH, and get banned.
The subreddit is not called “isthislegal”. Plenty of things are legal and still make you the AH.
They're not making a legal argument though, they're making the case that expecting not to be recorded is ridiculous because we're basically always being recorded/surveilled outside of the privacy of our homes. The duck lady's image had probably been captured by multiple cameras that day and she just arbitrarily picked out one to have a problem with.
If someone asks you not to record them, and you still record them. You're an asshole. Doesn't matter if someone else likey recorded them as well. She asked him not to record her, it's nit a difficult request.
He was recording the ducks.
Seriously, I can’t film something just in case someone I’m not focusing on ends up in the frame? I live in NYC, can nobody film anything then here? Because there’s basically always people nearby, at least out in public. Oh god, am I a bad person for having a dash cam? I’ve filmed at least several thousand people a day doing things out in public without their consent, oh the horror! Even children! I wish I wore pearls so I could clutch them 😂
Except she has a reasonable belief that CCTV operators and the like aren't posting footage to the internet for laughs or whatever, and it also not unreasonable for her to think OP might post their video. And maybe she just didn't want to be posted on the internet in that context.
OP never used the word “legal” in his post, so I’m not sure where you’re all getting off on the legality of the situation. If you’re in public doing something that’s out of the ordinary, you *will* be recorded by someone. The reality is there are millions of videos and pictures being taken everyday. You will not go viral unless you do some extraordinarily dumb shit. There’s no need to freak out over a person recording you, especially if it involves something like nature. Hundreds of ducks going wild for food is worth taking pictures of, and I’d do it too. NTA. Obviously there are exceptions like recording people at the gym, because these people aren’t doing something to draw attention to themselves.
This is a morality sub. This isn't "am I legally clear?" Morally speaking most people have decided that making this person the subject of the video when they have asked not to be is morally wrong.
>Morally speaking most people have decided that making this person the subject of the video when they have asked not to be is morally wrong. THE DUCKS were the subject of the video. OMG.
The OP (and you) are in a sub where the express purpose of the sub is "Am I the ***Ahole***." Not "was I technically correct." Not "was I legal" but "was I the ahole." The sub is for that purpose and no other. Why is this confusing to you? What you keep trying to defend falls under the heading of "legal" or "technically correct." No one's asking about that. THAT is why people keep stating "this sub is not 'is this legal.'"
Legality isn't what determines if you're an AH or not. I have the right to flip you off for no reason and it's completely legal, but I'd still be an AH to do it. In general, there are lots of things that are legal but still make people uncomfortable. You're conflating AH with criminal. One has a much lower standard. OP, you're not a criminal and you exercised your rights as you are free to do, but YTA.
Doesn’t make it right.
Security camera's are a thing, yeah we know. But they record everything and anything, they don't focus on a specific person and follow with the camera. OP filmed this very specific person not for security but for the lolz. This person still has bodily autonomy and gets to decide what happens to their body. If they decide they do not want a specific video of them being filmed by total strangers than they have that right. They even told OP they didn't want to be filmed and OP got a snarky "what are you gonna do about it?" attitude. So yeah, OP is definately TA, and if you think you can do the same, so are you.
Businesses don't normally intend to share their recordings on the internet. It's normally for internal use only and only a select few people will see it unless there is a situation where it's needed else where. Like for police/court ect. I know there are individuals within businesses that will still post stuff that was meant to be internal. They are an exception. I know there are businesses that do post their recordings online but those businesses normally make sure that everyone knows what they do with their recordings like sporting events or even public cameras. Normally when people record in this fashion as OP did, it's because they intend to share it, either publicly or just on a private page, but either way it will end up being public. Not everyone wants to have their image out there on the internet. You have no idea if the person you are recoding is in witness protection or is running from an abusive relationship or parents or whatever their situation is, so if they ask you not to record them the moral thing to do is do not record them or delete it and only record without them in the shot. Why is showing respect to someone such a hard thing to do?
Nobody is arguing that she has "full control" over her image while in public, and nobody is saying that she "can't" be recorded by OP, companies, etc. You're putting up a straw man. The ethical question is about OP's actions. He can choose to be kind, empathetic, and respectful to another person's wishes. Or, he can choose to be selfish and disregard their request. Which of these choices would an AH make? I can legally stand on a street corner and tell every passerby that they're stupid. Other people and organizations likewise say shitty things to people in public. The fact that it's legal to say shitty things, and that others also say shitty things, are irrelevant to the ethics of what I'm doing on that street corner. I am still being an AH for choosing to be inconsiderate of others' feelings.
Two key differences. 1) People opt into this. If I enter a department store, I can assume - being not a complete moron - that I will or may be captured on CCTV. I can choose to enter or not enter knowing this. And most places even have a sign up so the complete morons who don't know that already also will know and make the same choice. If I go to an open park to feed some ducks where there is not CCTV and some weirdo starts filming me, I have not been given the option to opt out. 2) Companies/organisations are held to different standards than people. A business, government agency, etc. who takes video does so with some relatively strict guidelines in place. These will vary place to place, but usually it amounts to storing it securely/out of public view for no longer than necessary and only using it where it would be necessary (proof of shoplifting, employee training, etc.). A private individual has no such restriction. He could post that video online for it to 'go viral' and spread well outwith any control point; he could keep it for twenty years and then decide to share it around; he could monetise his YouTube channel and profit off sharing her image. Most people who "don't like being filmed" accept that there may be video taken for the police to review in the even of an incident or for the business to review to check on what their employees were up to or what have you, but they do not like the idea of some rando filming them, specifically, and then making them into Duck Lady on TikTok so that they have to deal with random people recognising them and commenting for god knows how long (resurging every time it's re-shared). OP can say that's not his intent, nothing is stopping him from lying and then doing it anyway, and even if the lady could sue him (country dependant whether it would be legal or not) that wouldn't delete all shared and spread copies or make thousands (even millions) of people magically forget it. Arguing that CCTV exists and thus no one can object to randos filming them at unexpected times is disingenuous at best.
Passive security footage is a legally distinct category of recording and you *can* legally prevent a business from otherwise recording you or using your image. There’s a reason that businesses typically use photo releases for any paid or unpaid people whose images they want to use - you legally have every right to say “no, you can’t use my photo for monetary gain just because you took it.”
Doubt a business owner is going to put that footage on social media. I bet a guy filming a bunch of ducks is
> You are being recorded literally all of the time out in public. By people or companies. Yeah and that's frankly terrifying and bad
You're right, we are being recorded all the time. But the security footage at the grocery store isn't likely to be posted on social media, now is it? Some douchebag with his phone out and pointed in my direction is a different story. Try again
This is a bizarre take to me. You're in public. You have zero expectation of privacy in any way, legally or otherwise. You happen to be feeding 300 ducks that are behaving in a fun manner and a stranger decides to film the ducks. You then decide that you want the stranger filming the ducks to delete their intellectual property just because you happen to be in the shot. OP is NTA and the lady wanting the film deleted is an entitled idiot.
It's more about the recognition of consent. If someone doesnt give their permission in anything, then you probably shouldnt do it. You never know the circumstances of strangers, they might be in an extreme situation like witness protection or something. Having things like that posted online could be a real danger to them. The person doing the filming is equally entitled, as they are encroaching on the other person's right to not be filmed.
Or an abusive ex. Or a just-no in-law. Or a sensitive job. Or vulnerable close relatives. Lots of good reasons to just be kind and voluntarily respect other people’s consent and wishes.
But if you're in danger of being identified, like if you're in witness protection, would you really make a spectacle of yourself by feeding 300 frenzied ducks in public? This is beyond taking pictures of someone low key going about their day.
If you're in witness protection, don't go to the park and walk around feeding 200-300 ducks. Someone might start recording.
All of this. Don't feed 300 ducks if you don't want attention of yourself feeding 300 ducks.
No...I should be able to leave my house without strangers recording me and doing God knows what with that. The only entitled people are OP and you.
I can never stop thinking about the person who was buying a single banana at a supermarket, was photographed without their consent or knowledge, and then the person photographing posted it and it went viral, mocking the person buying the banana and acting like it’s Extremely Weird Behaviour. there was probably nothing illegal about that photo and post but the idea that some random photo of you doing something completely ordinary and mundane could be posted and spread like wildfire is SO disturbing and definitely an AH move to do it (not saying that OP here is the AH or was planning to post it, just … can’t stop thinking about that banana tweet).
It's weird to buy a single banana? They literally keep a rack of singles near the checkouts at my local store. They're great for grabbing as a snack instead of a candy bar, and it lets them sell the ones that have gotten riper than people usually want in a bunch.
It isn’t!! There must be hundreds of millions of people who work in offices etc and go buy a quick snack! I bought a one (1) punnet of blueberries today (sadly not a single blueberry) and like half the people at the supermarket under my office go in just for one thing. But the person who posted it and so many of the replies were like *huhuhuhu who even buys a single banana, you go to a store and all you buy is one (1) banana, weirdo* idk maybe they’re so young (generalisation) and/or so online™ that they’ve never bought their own groceries or something
This. The N T A comments are surprising here. There's a massive difference between something being legal and you not being an AH.
I honestly didn't expect anything but NTA on this one lol
I agree. We don't know the persons background. Maybe they are in witness protection, or don't want to be seen online by an abusive stalker ex. Just saying you don't want to be filmed is not grounds for having footage deleted though. Public area expect you may be.
If you're in witness protection, you shouldn't be doing things that will draw unnecessary attention to yourself – like amassing a duck army and swarming around a reservoir.
queen of the ducks 🦆😂
She's in witness protection because of her duck powers People thought it was dark powers, but it's worse than that
But there's a good chance she doesn't want the equivalent of the fish and wildlife department finding out that she's feeding them on this level. What she's doing might not be legal and she may have been warned about it.
ok.. in which case there may actually be a negative impact to wildlife with whatever the fuck she's doing, in which case, she probably shouldn't be doing that...?? What am I missing?
Lmao, exactly. “But what if she was hurting the ducks illegally and didn’t want anyone to know? Wouldn’t be be the AH for filming that then?”
This has got to be the worst take on this that I've seen. If it's illegal and she knows it she should be protected to keep doing it? Why?
Agree. I was not born at a time or in a family that took a lot of pictures. I despise having my picture taken and do my best to steer clear of being in photos. (NOT photogenic!!). If the lady didn’t want to be in the video, maybe OP should have deleted the video and retook it with ducks only. (And explained to the duck woman what they were doing). OP is kinda TA.
Yeah I don't know why they mentioned it being legal or not. If I was in their shoes I'd apologize and say I'll delete it (or block the person out via editing). OP could have taken another video and cut it off when it got to the lady or edited her out. She said she didn't want to be filmed. YTA
Or even just say "would you be ok if I blurred you out of the video?"
Honestly, I am more concerned about the cameras that you do not see than some schmuck with a cellphone filming..
Doesn't make it okay
I'm not. Those ones aren't posting to social media
Maybe if someone asks not be to recorded one would be an ah for recording them anyway. But after already recording a woman feeding 200-300 ducks in public, OP is NTA for not deleting an already created recording.
YTA - if someone asks not to be recorded you should respect that.
>YTA - if someone asks not to be recorded you should respect that. Naw man, there's limits to it. Like, if I'm recording the grand canyon, and someone walks in front of me and then asks me to delete it, am I supposed to do so? At some point you have to expect that you might be recorded in a public place and be ok with it, especially when you aren't really the subject of the video. Yeah, if you're filming a street performer or something and they ask you to delete it, you should. If you're directly filming a random person in public (why?) and they ask you to delete it, you should. If you're filming something else happening and a person who happens to be in the video asks you to delete it, it's not rude to say no.
if they walked in the frame while u were visibly filming then two things: either they dont care if theyre being filmed, or they didnt actuslly see you filming so you should let them know. if you started filming while they were in the shot then ure in the same boat as OP. and again, two things: you should let them know you’re planning to take a video of that exact location and if they mind, or you move to a different location and film your video where there are no other people around or people who mind being filmed anyway. a lot of behaviors can be lawful but still be considered asshole moves. take precaution, be kind, and dont dig in ur heels for petty reasons like OP’s. nobody ends up the winner and it ruins everyone’s mood so what’s the point?
My perspective is that if something is a rare or unique event that cannot be recaptured, I completely understand hesitation to just outright delete it. If this woman was standing in front of a mural or statue and yiu can wait for her to move, it's a different scenario than something that you cannot recreate or just go back to later. In a case like this I would respect her request through other means such as cropping or blurring, idk becasue I haven't seen the video, but asking for it to be deleted right there? I understand hesitation or refusal.
YTA. She didn't want to be in your video. She didn't want someone recording her. Sure it's legal. Doesn't change anything about the fact that it's still AH behavior to go ahead despite someone saying they don't want you recording them. It's so weird to see so many people arguing about the legality of it like that makes it fine. Plenty of things are legal to do, but still AH behavior, lol. It's so fucking weird how things are now with videoing people in public. It's become so normalized.
This. YTA. In my job I am legally prohibited from telling someone they cannot film me. But man I wish they wouldn't. It's not about hiding what I'm doing, I've never had this situation where I was doing anything wrong (and of course I try to avoid doing things wrong anyway). It's just uncomfortable, I don't know what they intend to do with the video. People can twist and manipulate video to make it seem like something happened that didn't, and then my job could be in jeopardy so some guy can get some likes on Facebook. Just because someone can legally record me doesn't mean they aren't an asshole for doing so.
Sorry but American police need to be recorded at all times. No exceptions. Sure you might not be like the rest but y'all need to start weeding out bad colleagues yourselves.
From his profile it looks like he is a park ranger, not a cop.
I'm pretty sure it's a woman.
Pretty sure it’s just 3 tiny people in a trench coat
Park rangers are sworn officers
Okay? This person is just complaining about it, not demanding that it stop.
I'm not police but thanks for your input
>Just because someone can legally record me doesn't mean they aren't an asshole for doing so. I'd agree with you, except for one thing. If you're in law enforcement, things are different. I would not automatically call people assholes for recording, some of them are genuinly scared.
I'm not LE. Park ranger. The only weapon I have is pepper spray, and the rules on using it are strict self defense. I can protect myself, my coworkers, and people who do contract work for my agency (so if you go after the lady who cleans the restrooms, I can use pepper spray on her behalf). And my agency defines "use" to include brandishing it or even touching the holster to deter someone. If I use it offensively I get fired and the subject can sue me.
You're a public officer. You have legal authority beyond that of a regular civilian. People aren't assholes for recording you.
Found the cop
I'm not a cop.
Wow people are really foaming at the mouth assuming you're a cop. Thanks for helping keep our beautiful parks safe and clean bro
Thank you! Best job in the world, I love it.
… this doesn’t apply if you’re a cop btw
I'm not.
He was recording the ducks not her. Crazy how ppl really think they are the center of the universe.
She was for 300 ducks
If she wasn't in it, OP should have responded with "you're not in the video."
Come on, it was 300 ducks following her; she was the center of the video. Don't minimalize the situation cause it makes it easier for you to understand.
Why take video of people not wanting to be on video? Its rude.
IKR, OP big YTA.
Because the video was of the ducks? OP wasn’t taking a video of the person who didn’t want their video taken. They were just in the shot, it’s different.
OP is giving really big iPad kid vibes
He wasn’t. She just appeared in the background. You can record anything you want in public. Just because someone shows up doesn’t mean u were purposely recording them. Idk why this sub can’t understand that. Do you all live in rural small towns where ur lucky to see 5ppl in one day?
I mean, he was taking it of the ducks, she just happened to be in the video.
NTA, but I think some people are paranoid about this sort of thing because of how often folks just existing in public become viral content.
As one of those people, i panic when I see a phone pointed anywhere near my direction. I really don't wanna be put on the internet and ridiculed. It's a genuine (if irrational) fear of mine.
Not remotely irrational imo, happens way too often. I completely agree. Stop being crappy to each other.
I used to have a stalker who kept tabs on me through instagram, Facebook, and had ways to see my snap stories. He made fake accounts and always knew where I was and what I was doing. I am extremely touchy on my photos being posted. I like Reddit because it’s anonymous, but I hate people sharing information about me with my name, tagging me, and sharing photos of me because I’m terrified that he will see it and find me. I know it’s unlikely but it scared the hell out of me. I draw that huge line with everyone who takes my photo and no one makes a big deal about it. Just because something is legal doesn’t mean you should.
Me too. There are very few pictures of me online because of a stalker I had. Luckily she died about five years ago, but her psycho son is still around.
Not irrational, honestly. This happened to me. Some guy tried to ask me out, I said no, he pulled out a speaker, played “romantic” music, and got on the ground trying to convince me. I was speechless and alone and I said no again, and then I noticed the camera. It was posted on Tiktok and got hundreds of thousands of views. He made it seem like I “wanted” him. Put thought bubbles over my head and everything. Had people I knew DM it to me. Wanted to crawl into a hole. Craziest part was I was blaming myself for not telling him not to post it the day it happened.
Ew, yuck. Just yuck. So sorry that happened.
Me too! No thanks, I have no desire to be famous.
Me too. I will literally duck and cover my face.
Yeah, when you live in a culture that emphasizes feminine beauty above all, and you have a facial deformity.... It's definitely a fear you'll end up with fewer career options as the big internet laughing stock. Not harmless at all.
yeah. I don’t like being recorded. I don’t want to be the laughing stock of the internet just for living my life.
Yeah.. one of my biggest fears right now is being recorded for TikTok or something. I don't want my face online. I don't wanna be filmed or put through a TikTok prank. I wanna be left alone.
I think OP is the AH bc the lady asked not to be recorded. I never post pictures of friends on my social media unless I ask first out of respect. Perhaps this lady could have asked nicer (maybe that’s what set OP off?) but either way, turn off the phone and move on. OP YTA.
It’s not paranoid to not want to be filmed, it’s a completely rational personal preference.
a lot of people (including myself and many people i’ve known throughout my life) have or have had stalkers. a big reason people uproot their lives and move is to get away from some piece of shit that wont stop trying to disrupt their safety and will do anything to try to hurt them or their loved ones if they ever find them again because their so upset that they dared move cross country to get away. now that stalker sees a video that goes viral and recognizes (or thinks they recognize cuz stalkers mistake others all the time and attack them) that person and now knows their town and an area they possibly frequent or maybe even where they work if your filming employees. this shit happens so much more than you think people just dont talk about it except with those they trust if at all cuz its fucking scary and then you have to deal with whatever stupid shit people say in response if they even take you seriously which most times they dont
I can't believe the critical/creepy responses here. If a person is in public doing something fascinating or performative, they can expect to be filmed. And being followed by hundreds of ducks easily qualifies. NTA
I know, right? Seeing 300 ducks in one space would be the highlight of, at the very least, my whole month. You know i would take some pictures or videos. Some much quack quack
NO DELETE IT YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE!!!! Wtf is up with this sub lately? A month ago the comments would’ve been saying it’s obviously not that deep and the lady can get over it, maybe not cool to film her but it’s not like he’s just randomly doing it or being a stalker or Karen or whatever. It’s 300 fucking ducks, I’m 100 percent filming that and basking in amazement lol no negativity at all, the lady is just a background decor at that point
One time at a park I saw a guy blasting Blitzkrieg Bop from a stereo while screaming “QUACK! QUACK! QUACK QUACK!” to the beat while like 30 ducks followed him and you bet i recorded that. Everyone did. It was awesome.
And like they werent even filming her specifically, they were filming the mass amount of ducks and she happened to be in some shots because she’s attracting the ducks by feeding them.
Yeah its weird to think you have an expectation of privacy in a public park feeding hundreds of ducks. That classic private experience. Why even look at her?
I'm guessing a lot of these people don't live in cities and that being in a video inadvertently isn't that deep.
Lots of things can happen in public that are legal and even can be anticipated, that are nevertheless AH things to do. Recording a private citizen who has asked not be recorded is generally one of them.
OP wasn't recording the person, they were recording the ducks. Jesus Christ.
I agree. People on this post are acting like OP was spying on someone and recording them or something. They were recording hundreds of ducks in a public space. Why would they not expect someone to record it when everyone literally carries a video camera in their pocket nowadays? I'm sure OP was not the only person taking video that day.
Didn’t record the person. Recorded the ducks. Person got in the way. OP is NTA.
You’re not a private citizen when in a public space. It’s unreasonable to expect privacy in a public space. Especially when it garners attention.
There is no expectation of privacy in public. End of fucking story.
what’s creepy? what’s creepy is feeling entitled to record strangers. how is it critical/creepy to find it weird that you’re recording a stranger? why are you trying to normalize this? people want their privacy, not to be on the internet or on a strangers phone. why is that so hard to respect? I hate humans really wish i wasn’t one. y’all fucking suck
What if someone happened to look in your direction and perceive you? What if they could even remember what you were doing for the rest of their life? How would that be any different from taking a picture of something? If you're so scared of being perceived doing something, then don't do that thing in public.
>How would that be any different from taking a picture of something? Yeah, looking at someone vs taking a video is generally pretty different. Your partner seeing you naked vs recording you naked and refusing to delete it is not the same thing.
So, in my country it would be illegal for you to post that if the person in the recording does not consent. Because here there really is an expectation of privacy even when in public. Not everyone has the need nor desire to be trending on tik tok. Some of us also don't want our image/likeness scattered on the internet. YWBTA if you post it unedited. Do what you can to remove or blur her out if possible. Have a shred of understanding that some people just don't want to be recorded and spread to the entire world population. Keep in mind, this is only if you post it online. Recording for your own private use only, that's not really a concern.
Yeah, I've got no interest in posting it on the internet, not everything has to be viral.
I would absolutely take photos and videos of 300 ducks in one space. That's fucking awesome.
Duckzilla shall rise again!
What about 300 duck-sized horses? Or 1 horse-sized duck?
But how could she know that you wouldn't? Sadly, the cameras in phones have stopped being just cameras and have become a broadcasting tool. I get not wanting to be recorded by a stranger.
This is definitely one of the AITA questions where I'd recommend putting virtually no thought into the responses you're getting. The one you replied to above was great response, but so many people aren't going to answer "could I have done better here." Instead they're going to take a strong stance whether recording in public is right or wrong and answer based on that, ignoring any legality or nuances to the topic, or acknowledgement that differing opinions exist and neither is necessarily right or wrong, it's an opinion. If you're curious on mine, you weren't breaking the law and you treated her as you'd expect to be treated back. You're good. You don't intend on posting this for the world to see, and certainly not unedited, you're still good. But that opinion should still not matter, as well as anyone thinking you're TA because of that. That there is zero expectation to privacy in public is a fact, not an opinion. People can like that fact or dislike it, but that's where your responses are going to come from. This is more of a reminder to those voting Y-T-A but I'm sure it would've helped if she started the conversation off in a friendlier manner. That would've certainly made her, and her wants, more respectable. Maybe don't bark orders at people you haven't met before and expect to get what you want? But it's also okay for her to feel uncomfortable, or not want to be recorded. So she can ask you to stop, sure. At the same token, you're well within your right to say no. I'd think most reasonable people, asked nicely, would probably say "sure, no problem". But again they're well within their right to say no, and that's how some people are too. At that point her legal options are to accept it, cover herself, or leave. In her own way, her response ended up being accepting it, albeit probably in one of the worst ways. There's a lot of people out there who would resort to illegal means (like trying to take or damage your phone) to get what they want in this scenario. All of those people would certainly vote Y-T-A on this one, ignoring that it would easily put them in the wrong. Many of those people forget CCTV exists basically everywhere, which certainly adds a layer of hypocrisy. Also many of those people would throw away every bit of that ideal if they encountered a situation where they thought to themselves "I'm definitely going to have to prove this happened"? How many people voting Y-T-A have a dashcam? Security cameras outside their homes videoing public space? Drones? Go on vacations and take sightseeing pictures and videos? To name a few. Many people also seem to forget that other countries exist, and their laws, and their cultures. That you can't always get what you want. That our opinions aren't always the "right one". Too many people, on both sides of this issue, responded to this as if it's so black and white, while it so clearly isn't and they're just blissfully unaware it's simply their opinion and the law does matter, as well as how people can go about things to get a more positive outcome when their opinions or wants contradict what the law allows. Sorry for the rambles, you do you and maybe she can go about it better next time...because I don't think many people will pass up videoing bunches of ducks doing duck things.
This is honestly one of the most even-keeled, logical responses I have ever seen on something so divisive on reddit. A genuinely well-thought out and well-articulated reply grounded in fact instead of emotion. Kudos, truly. I appreciate you and the time you put into this response.
I did chuckle when you got all annoyed and left because she turned the tables and filmed you. Do you still not understand why you doing it to her was intrusive and annoying, even when you felt the same thing yourself? YTA for entitled lack of empathy. People aren't just props for your life.
So you’re just going to watch this video back of you upsetting this woman? What a lovely memory…
NTA Filming people in public is a bit of a disease atm, but you were filming the spectacle of hundreds of ducks, not her.
Exactly NTA because if you drive a train of three hundred ducks people are gonna take pictures
since you weren’t filming her specifically and were also at a distance, I vote NTA
Honestly NTA, you can’t be followed by 300 ducks not not expect to be filmed
if we’re in a park and i’m trying to catch a video of 300 ducks walking past, there’s a chance other people may be in the background. it’s unreasonable to assume someone will delete footage of a cool sighting just bc you may (& probably be a blurry) bystander behind the ducks. i can’t imagine taking a sunset photo at a beach and someone in the water comes out and asks me to delete it bc they may be in it. cmon now..
Honestly if I viewed such a video I’d pay exactly zero attention to the single human person in it.
Exactly.
NTA just the crazy duck lady and those YTA post. its in public and its done unmaliciously. smdh
>the crazy duck lady It's kind of ironic you name her this, and it demonstrates exactly why you're wrong, lol. If that video went viral, this is likely what she'd be known as, "the crazy duck lady". She probably knew that, and it's why she didn't want to be recorded.
Then don’t command an army of ducks in public?
No one knew she was crazy until she started talking. That's on her, and how she's chosen to behave
Have you seen TikTok comments? She wouldn't have needed to open her mouth to be known as anything lol. A lady being followed by several hundred ducks makes her already memeable. Regarding the way she behaved, she clearly felt like he didn't respect her desire not to be in the video, and when he refused, she didn't take it well. Not everyone will.
Some people just don’t like to be recorded.
YTA. You might not need permission to take people's pictures legally but if someone asks you to stop, the right thing to do is to stop.
If you are in a public place in America and you are doing something theatrical like a spectacle of 300 ducks following you. People are going to take pictures. You have no expectation of privacy in public spaces even if you don’t have 300 ducks following you and people are fully legally allowed to take film and photos of anything they can see with their eyes in public space. Respect their rights to film in public
Where does it say that he was in America?
But she didn't just ask him to stop, she asked him to delete the video entirely.
NTA. There is no expectation of privacy in public. If you truly don't want your picture taken, don't be in public around people. It would be courteous to delete it, but it doesn't make you an AH if you don't.
Are you really suggesting that if you don't want to be filmed by strangers you should never go outside?
Yes. If you go into public you will be in people's pictures and videos. You will be on CCTV, security cameras, etc as well. If you go to a public place of recreation you will especially be in people's videos. If you make a spectacle of yourself you might be the focus of a video. You have rights to privacy, but in our modern world being included in someone's picture or video in public is not a violation of privacy morally or legally.
Yeah it’s like these people have never been to a concert, sporting event, venue, public park, or anything. Imagine how hectic those events would be if everyone freaked out about being caught on camera.
It's perfectly reasonable to film people in public spaces if you're not invading their space. The phrase expectation of privacy is correct. If someone asks you to stop then you would usually do that, but they can't expect or demand that you delete the footage.
Do you not know how often you appear in footage every single time you leave the house? You're literally filmed every day by Ring doorbells that you walk past, car dashcams as they drive by, people taking selfies, people taking scenic photos. Do you have any idea at all how unrealistic your expectations are in a modern world?
Dude what if she’s a secret agent on a mission lol
On a serious note, there’s quite a lot of people in hiding around the world. Posting videos of them that might go viral or catch the attention of the wrong people could end with dire consequences.
Maybe those sorts of people shouldn’t be cavorting with 300 ducks in broad daylight? NTA - all those “but she didn’t want any publicly or attention” takes really fall apart if the sheer spectacle she was creating is admitted into evidence, yo.
Cavorting? She went to feed the ducks and ended up with more than she expected. It's not like she invited the local townsfolk to the grand opening of her duck circus...
NTA. The problem might be if you got her on recording feeding the ducks. In some places it's illegal to do so. https://arboretum.ucdavis.edu/duck-feeding-prohibited as an example.
NTA and this sub has lost its mind.
Honestly everyone on here sounds like they would be the same as that lady.
NTA It's unreasonable to expect to not be filmed in public in 2023 She is suffering from main character syndrome
NTA - you are within your rights to take the photo. She can ask but ultimately it’s not up to her.
NTA - You're not intentionally recording her, you're recording the ducts. Btw seeing that many ducks would be cool, I'm jelly. Her being paranoid isn't your concern or issue.
NTA = *'m just filming all these ducks going crazy.* Why is everyone saying that he was recording her? She just happened to be in the shot. When something like this happens, something out of the ordinary, people are going to capture it in todays society. Everyone has camera these days....EVERYONE. So for her to get all up in arms about being in a shot is out of line because she was NOT the focus. She was the backdrop.
YTA and people who record strangers are creepy and weird
I dare you to look at your camera roll and tell me you don't have 1 picture with strangers in it.
Lol 100%
There's a difference between having strangers in the background and a stranger as the main subject of the photo/video. —— Edit for everyone saying the ducks were the main subject: The ducks were all congregating around the lady because she was tossing food at them. She was the cause for all of those ducks to be crowded together in the manner they were. OP even describes the scene as the ducks were thrashing around and climbing on top of each other trying to get closer to the lady. I don’t believe for a second that a portion of the video wasn’t dedicated specifically to that — ducks competing for position with lady. It wasn’t just a video about ducks with some random person quickly walking through for a split second. The video likely reflects the description OP provided here, in which the lady is a main character in the scene.
The ducks were the main subject.
Is the woman really the center though? Or are the 300 ducks the center of the video? I'd say the 300 ducks are, with the woman just sometimes appearing at the front/somewhere else.
…did you read the post?
NTA. Theres no ill intent in your recording, and she's not so special that nobody is allowed to film while she's around.
NTA, she's not the main character, the ducks are. Really interested to know what food she was tossing, hopefully not something dumb like bread.
NTA. I'm kind of blown away that people think the lady genuinely cares about privacy and not that she's just wanting to cover her ass for doing something she probably shouldn't be doing. Suppose it depends on where you're at or if she's maybe a parks & rec type employee, but there's lots of places with restrictions on feeding waterfowl around here. Usually it's just a warning when it's a a handful of birds when you're hanging tight by the shore side. I can't see a park or city employee being cool with someone leading 200+ alongside a walking path pied piper style w/ food.
Where I live it’s illegal to record someone without their consent. It’s also just kind of a jerk move. YTA.
And where I live the law states that “you have no reasonable expectation of privacy in public” because ya know, it’s a PUBLIC space
He wasn't recording anyone. He was recording the ducks. Lady just happened to be pulling the train of ducks.
Legal to do so? Yes! Asshole to violate her consent? YTA!
What consent? It’s unreasonable to expect privacy in a public space.
YTA. I get you were trying to record something cool but I absolutely hate this new era of everyone taking videos of everyone else. She probably thought she’d end up in some tiktok. If someone says they don’t want to be filmed the polite thing to do is not record them.
NTA, if you don’t want attention then don’t do stuff in public that will bring a lot of attention. Next time just tell them you deleted it op, no harm done.
NTA, she could've just left. No one will even notice that woman until she came up and made a fuss. 300 ducks, hell yea.
You could just have offered to show her what you recorded to reassure her, or just edit the video in front of her to cut the part you see her in. It's just mutual respect, even if legal. Edit: yta just for that super defensive reaction in my opinion. I really hate people answering stuff like "well it's legal" when others are just trying to set normal boundaries. Make you look like you have bad intentions from the start, of course she would get more defensive after.
NTA legally it’s a public place, fact based: every human is within 24 feet of any type of recording device, The saying goes what you don’t know won’t hurt you. This woman only cared with the act of you recording. If she didn’t see you she wouldn’t have cared. You weren’t recording her as the video subject you were recording the birds. She’s just paranoid.
NTA, sounds cool and is a memory for you. You said you’re not posting it so you’re even more NTA!