Inappropriate bahaviour

[nickprior]

... and of course, the law says nothing about people behaving properly in performances. Using cameras with flashes is just plain ignorant - I agree there!

 

[subaqua]

I think if us actors refused to go on, there's not a whole heap that the management could do other than to eject the person in question.




A theatre is private property, hence why you have to pay to get in.

somebody did get hoofed out of a theatre once after the lead berated him for having a mobile on. wasn't long ago in the UK IIRC

 

[nickprior]

somebody did get hoofed out of a theatre once after the lead berated him for having a mobile on. wasn't long ago in the UK IIRC

Wasn't that Patrick Stewart? Quite right too.

 

[classic33]

If you take a photo in the theatre, the photographs become the property of the venue, legally.
Not the case. I have in the past taken photos that were later used for posters & other material by the people being photographed. However if you are saying that they become the legal property of the venue, then the venue must get you to sign a disclaimer to that effect. Which makes nonsense of the ticket disclaimer, prohibiting photography

There is a disclaimer on the back of the tickets, on the website and next to the box office that photography is banned during the performance and and equipment used to do so may be confiscated and destroyed:



So film would be removed from the camera and probably destroyed. By buying a ticket, you have agreed to their terms and conditions, so it's all legal and above board.
You or any other private individual atempt to/remove film from a camera & you can be met with one hefty repair/replacement bill. Attempting to seize the equipment will be counted as attempted theft, much the same as someone trying to pinch your phone/camera in the street. Local theatre found that bit out when one of their "securtity" attempted it. Reported & the "security" led out in handcuffs by the police.

I'm not saying I'm in agreement with it necessarily, and frankly it was one of the worst parts of the job, but there you have it. Read the T&Cs before you take a picture in a theatre is my advice.

In a school play, this is especially ridiculous though. The whole point of schools plays is so parents can record it and show it to your first boyfriend, years later, surely?

The small print is put there, on the back of the ticket as a matter of course. Much like the one that says that the drinking of alcohol within the premises is not allowed either. Many theatre's have bars in them don't they, selling alcohol by any chance?

 

[classic33]

......Oh have I?

Yes. I'm forever being told I'm not on this planet.

 

[MissTillyFlop]

Not the case. I have in the past taken photos that were later used for posters & other material by the people being photographed. However if you are saying that they become the legal property of the venue, then the venue must get you to sign a disclaimer to that effect. Which makes nonsense of the ticket disclaimer, prohibiting photography

You have used their photographs with their permission, which is a different case all together. The performers are on private property and have every right to refuse your taking photographs of them.

The small print is put there, on the back of the ticket as a matter of course. Much like the one that says that the drinking of alcohol within the premises is not allowed either. Many theatre's have bars in them don't they, selling alcohol by any chance?

That isn't in the terms and conditions referenced (http://www.atgtickets.com/page/terms/) and I would find it odd if it was. It says that if you are behaving inappropriately due to drinking then you may be ejected and that you may not bring food or drink purchased outside the premises.

I am going to find out more on this, as it's got me thinking. I looked on the Met website and it did say that if you have a phone confiscated in a school that it is not theft and the school is not liable for any loss or damage to the phone, so I assume it would be the same in a theatre.

Personally I think they should just ban the idiots.

 

[classic33]

You have used their photographs with their permission, which is a different case all together. The performers are on private property and have every right to refuse your taking photographs of them.

They have used my photographs, with my permission, for their means. Their appears to be a slight mis-understanding as to what a photograph actually is. Slightly out of date, as it doesn't appear to cater for digital means, but for film its ok.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/photograph


That isn't in the terms and conditions referenced (http://www.atgtickets.com/page/terms/) terms & conditions as set out by a third party, not the actual venue. and I would find it odd if it was. It says that if you are behaving inappropriately due to drinking then you may be ejected and that you may not bring food or drink purchased outside the premises.

It would appear that some theatres take the view the other way. They can film you & use it.
http://www.bradford-theatres.co.uk/terms

 

[MissTillyFlop]

It would appear that some theatres take the view the other way. They can film you & use it.
http://www.bradford-theatres.co.uk/terms

I feel like you're missing the point - the medium doesn't matter.

The play is subject to copyright, the images of the production are subject to copyright and are all part of the terms of the agreement the theatre has with the performing rights society.

Aside from any legality (which I am disputing as the Met have stated that confiscation is not theft on their website), it is really inconsiderate and anti - social to take photos during a play - it distracts both the other audience members and the actors. If we are reduced to the type of people who are too stupid to adhere to social conventions unless they are the letter of the law, then I weep for society.

 

[MissTillyFlop]

terms & conditions as set out by a third party, not the actual venue.

They own the venue, it's not a third party, it's their theatre.

 

[classic33]

I feel like you're missing the point - the medium doesn't matter.

The play is subject to copyright, the images of the production are subject to copyright and are all part of the terms of the agreement the theatre has with the performing rights society.

Aside from any legality (which I am disputing as the Met have stated that confiscation is not theft on thjeir website), it is really inconsiderate and anti - social to take photos during a play - it distracts both the other audience members and the actors. If we are reduced to the type of people who are too stupid to adhere to social conventions unless they are the letter of the law, then I weep for society.

The link given is from the venue stating that they can film/photograph you & you have no claim against them on that ground. Not as you put, a third party adding their own terms & conditions.

Not everyone will use flash in a theatre. It can ruin the shot. However most compact cameras will fire off the flash in any low light situation.

You damage or destroy my property & you are legally bound to replace it. But I notice where once you used the word destroy, you now use confiscate, which would mean having to return it. Undamaged. Damaged & you are legally liable. I speak from personal experience.

 

[MissTillyFlop]

The link given is from the venue stating that they can film/photograph you & you have no claim against them on that ground. Not as you put, a third party adding their own terms & conditions.

Not everyone will use flash in a theatre. It can ruin the shot. However most compact cameras will fire off the flash in any low light situation.

You damage or destroy my property & you are legally bound to replace it. But I notice where once you used the word destroy, you now use confiscate, which would mean having to return it. Undamaged. Damaged & you are legally liable. I speak from personal experience.

I didn't specify flash photography. I meant any photography - it's anti social and spoils the play for the other audience members and those trying to do their job. IE the actors

 

[vernon]

I am going to find out more on this, as it's got me thinking. I looked on the Met website and it did say that if you have a phone confiscated in a school that it is not theft and the school is not liable for any loss or damage to the phone, so I assume it would be the same in a theatre.

Personally I think they should just ban the idiots.

You have misinterpreted what you have read. The phone has to be returned to the child eventually. Normally this happens when the school requests that a parent turns up to collect it. There has been a subtle change in the rules for schools regarding confiscations and puts more power into the hands of the schools particularly when phones are used as bullying tools.

You can not extend school rules (sic) to theatres or anywhere else.

 

[classic33]

I didn't specify flash photography. I meant any photography - it's anti social and spoils the play for the other audience members and those trying to do their job. IE the actors

I think you did

What about my right to do my job without some ape distracting me with a flash?

I don't see why it should have to be a legal requirement in order to behave appropriately or observe and abide by the etiquette of the situation they are in. And also you should be obilged to consider others in any public space, most of all a place where other people have paid to be.
quote]

Taking your last point first. I too will have paid to enter. I do consider others when taking photographs in such situations. I will move away from others, whilst still allowing myself the best chance of getting the picture. Its also worth noting that in the UK at least, no-one has copyright over their own features. Props & backgrounds will have been made to suit the venue. Normally by a third party, who will own the copyright, not the venue.

Medium does matter, as the law has yet to catch up. I said earlier that police no longer fingerprint you. Instead they scan your fingerprints. The resulting information is then stored in binary form on magnetic medium. Therefore there is no picture. That is the argument that is used by more than one police force, the met included.

But as a final point. To pick upon something you raised earlier about the actors refusing to go on. What if the audience were to get up & depart at the start of the show. Or following reviews so bad that people stayed away. Your services would not be required, what then?

Its a two edge sword that many may not realise, can make or break a performance. Until its too late.

 

[MissTillyFlop]

I think you did

So I did. I do think it anti social to take any sort of film footage, photos etc etc As well as talking during the show, using your phone, bringing in smelly food, being smelly yourself and making a noise of any sort during the performance unless it's some sort of emergency, obviously.

 

[MissTillyFlop]

You have misinterpreted what you have read. The phone has to be returned to the child eventually. Normally this happens when the school requests that a parent turns up to collect it. There has been a subtle change in the rules for schools regarding confiscations and puts more power into the hands of the schools particularly when phones are used as bullying tools.

You can not extend school rules (sic) to theatres or anywhere else.

Well by definition, if you confiscate anything belonging to someone else, you have to return it. And we always had to get a manager to confiscate a phone or camera. We gave the audience member the choice of us deleting the pictures or having it confiscated.

Most people were just unaware (even though they were told as they went in) and deleted the photographs themselves.