If there was a problem with cameras recording it should have been posted.
If there were copyright issues the people attending would or should have been asked to sign something saying they understood they were not allowed to record anything.
The fact that event was billed as Open to the public may or may not negate a private property claim.
I am not a lawyer and I didn’t even sleep in a Holiday Inn Express.
The thugs had not authority to assult the man. I hope he presses charges.
Agreed.
Good grief, it was a public political forum hosted in a church. As a political newbie, our group has hosted forums that we filmed, and we still had NO problem if someone attending wanted to film it as well, so long as they were not intrusive in doing so. Heck, technology being what it is, we might have needed to borrow their copy ; P
We welcomed their efforts because we were assuming/hoping that they were interested enough to actually take it home to share it with family and friends who might not have been able to attend.
God bless,
Tatt
Agreed, and I don't know if they did that or not. But I do know that they announced very publicly that this was not allowed. And no admission fee was paid, correct?
I don't want The State coming in and telling churches what rules they must use for attendance.
If there were copyright issues the people attending would or should have been asked to sign something saying they understood they were not allowed to record anything.
Oh, yeah...every concert I've attended had long lines as people filled out the paperwork to go inside. Or not.
I'm not a lawyer and I didn't get enough sleep last night anyway, but check out this and here.
Especially in light of the latter link, I think that a lot of it would hinge on whether the event was equivalent to being in the public square. What a bad precedent it would set to claim that a church is equivalent to public property.