Meta Glasses Banned at ComicCon After "Secret Filming"

[Webster]

(BBC News) The promoter behind some of the biggest comic and entertainment conventions in the UK has banned Meta glasses from its events to stop “secret filming” of guests and attendees.

Monopoly Events said a number of guests had told the company they would be reluctant to appear at Comic-Con shows again after cases of recordings taking place without their knowledge. The ban is applicable to Meta glasses and any other “wearable recording devices”.

Attendees caught using the devices will be asked to leave the convention, but some fans on social media warned the move could negatively affect disabled attendees.

Devices like Meta glasses feature an almost invisible camera in the frames, with small speakers in the arms. Wearers can record video or take a photo by touching the frame – usually activating a light on the glasses in the process.

In a social media statement, Monopoly Events said: “After a consultation period we can no longer permit the wearing of any recording device at our events.

Meta glasses banned by Comic-Con promoter after 'secret filming'

A number of guests said they would be reluctant to appear at conventions again after cases of recordings taking place without their knowledge.

www.bbc.com

 

[Lamb]

Are they also banning all phones that can record?

 

[Frankj]

Those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear.

Or so I'm told.

 

[tango]

Are they also banning all phones that can record?

At least if someone is using a phone to record it's usually pretty easy to see what they are doing. Someone wearing glasses that are recording is a much more covert thing than someone holding a phone up.

 

[Romanos]

At least if someone is using a phone to record it's usually pretty easy to see what they are doing. Someone wearing glasses that are recording is a much more covert thing than someone holding a phone up.

Some stores are even selling covers for the light that is on when recording, so now that is even more of a worry.

 

[tango]

Some stores are even selling covers for the light that is on when recording, so now that is even more of a worry.

It seems like a small piece of tape would cover over a light. I can't say I study the glasses of people I see in any detail.

 

[Lamb]

At least if someone is using a phone to record it's usually pretty easy to see what they are doing. Someone wearing glasses that are recording is a much more covert thing than someone holding a phone up.

It's not always easy to tell when someone is just holding a phone in a nonchalant way. I used to have students take my pic in school when I was a sub and it was hard to tell.

 

[tango]

It's not always easy to tell when someone is just holding a phone in a nonchalant way. I used to have students take my pic in school when I was a sub and it was hard to tell.

True, but at least someone who isn't holding a phone at all probably isn't recording with a phone. Someone wearing a pair of glasses might be wearing regular glasses, they might be wearing something that helps them identify things, they might be recording.

This thing with Comic-con is really no different to the ongoing potential issue of people recording in areas you'd expect privacy - changing rooms, communal showering spaces etc.

 

[Frankj]

True, but at least someone who isn't holding a phone at all probably isn't recording with a phone. Someone wearing a pair of glasses might be wearing regular glasses, they might be wearing something that helps them identify things, they might be recording.

This thing with Comic-con is really no different to the ongoing potential issue of people recording in areas you'd expect privacy - changing rooms, communal showering spaces etc.

The difference is that in changing rooms and communal showers you have a reasonable expectation of privacy since it is generally illegal to record there and in a general exposition public assembly area that is fully public you do not.

Wherever you go outside your home just accept that there is probably someone recording you on some device and even a good potential that someone is legally or illegally recording you inside it as well.

 

[tango]

The difference is that in changing rooms and communal showers you have a reasonable expectation of privacy since it is generally illegal to record there and in a general exposition public assembly area that is fully public you do not.

Wherever you go outside your home just accept that there is probably someone recording you on some device and even a good potential that someone is legally or illegally recording you inside it as well.

Sure, there are expectations of privacy. That's not really a technical difference - if someone wants to record without the consent of another it makes little practical difference whether they are recording someone in the street, in the shower, or through the crack in their bedroom curtains. The issue is covert recording, which makes it easier to record without consent.

 

[Lamb]

Most tickets to any type of event have a disclaimer that by entering you agree to be filmed. So if they can film you, why can't you film it?

 

[tango]

Most tickets to any type of event have a disclaimer that by entering you agree to be filmed. So if they can film you, why can't you film it?

Probably for the same reason that if you lie to Congress it's called perjury but if Congress lies to you it's called politics.

If the rules of entry are that you agree to be filmed and also agree not to film, if you don't like the rules you don't have to buy a ticket.

 

[Frankj]

Sure, there are expectations of privacy. That's not really a technical difference - if someone wants to record without the consent of another it makes little practical difference whether they are recording someone in the street, in the shower, or through the crack in their bedroom curtains. The issue is covert recording, which makes it easier to record without consent.

If they're on the street it is legal to do so, if it's in the shower or through the bedroom windows with the curtains closed it is something you can have them put in jail for doing.

And as I said, always assume you are being recorded when in public and that the recording is legal to make. Even inside your house or backyard it is common for police and such to make both legal warranted recordings and illegal surveillance recordings without a warrant. And there isn't much you can do about illegal police recording except prevent it being used as evidence it they prosecute you or someone else in your home for something.

It's the world we live in now, not much to do about it but be aware.

 

[tango]

If they're on the street it is legal to do so, if it's in the shower or through the bedroom windows with the curtains closed it is something you can have them put in jail for doing.

And as I said, always assume you are being recorded when in public and that the recording is legal to make. Even inside your house or backyard it is common for police and such to make both legal warranted recordings and illegal surveillance recordings without a warrant. And there isn't much you can do about illegal police recording except prevent it being used as evidence it they prosecute you or someone else in your home for something.

It's the world we live in now, not much to do about it but be aware.

I suspect we're talking at cross purposes here.

At the end of the day if it's a condition of entry that you don't film, the organisers may impose additional rules to enforce their no-filming rule. If you don't like the rule nobody is forcing you to buy a ticket.