zugmann Euclid So where is the grievance that seems to be the subject of this thread? The question I have is what happens when you and your family are having a picnic and some stranger shows up and starts waving at you and your family? When the title of the video is the very click-batey and cringey: "Cops Called For Filming Train In Public! Approached By Conductor & Told Not To Film, 1st Amendment" That's what causes the conversation. I get it - many youtubers make overly dramatic titles to get views *cough* Scotty Kilmer *cough*. WE can look at it 3 ways: 1. legal vs illegal 2. right vs. wrong 3. youtube community guidelines allowed or not?
Euclid So where is the grievance that seems to be the subject of this thread? The question I have is what happens when you and your family are having a picnic and some stranger shows up and starts waving at you and your family?
When the title of the video is the very click-batey and cringey:
"Cops Called For Filming Train In Public! Approached By Conductor & Told Not To Film, 1st Amendment"
That's what causes the conversation.
I get it - many youtubers make overly dramatic titles to get views *cough* Scotty Kilmer *cough*.
WE can look at it 3 ways:
1. legal vs illegal
2. right vs. wrong
3. youtube community guidelines allowed or not?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
selectorYou could make the argument that decency, courtesy, good manners, good breeding, good upbringing...they all require a person to be sensitive to the wishes of others, but there is no natural, legal, or ethical requirement for a person to accede to that person's wishes.
The tact and grace with which the aggrieved responds is a factor as well. Based upon the responses of some they appear on the verge of going Neanderthal on the guy.
Of course, tact and grace probably wouldn't do much good in this specific instance, because the Tuber appears to want to provoke a reaction.
charlie hebdoA conductor working on his train and on his railroad is not in public. Rather he is on private property. Legally someone else does not have the right to video without permission
That's really untrue. The litmus is "reasonable expectation of privacy", If you are in open view, you have none.
Standing in your front yard with no pants on might be a good example. See how many people respect your privacy.
A conductor working on his train and on his railroad is not in public. Rather he is on private property. Legally someone else does not have the right to video without permission and if then using it commercially he must obtain a release. Maybe it is different in Canada as much is.
The key legal element is the expectation of privacy. If on private property, that expectation exists.
There is nothing inherently unethical about photographing a person in public where the conventions, customs, culture, or laws do not proscribe such action. The reason it is not unethical is because it is not wrong.
You could make the argument that decency, courtesy, good manners, good breeding, good upbringing...they all require a person to be sensitive to the wishes of others, but there is no natural, legal, or ethical requirement for a person to accede to that person's wishes.
How many views has the video gotten from this thread? Ka-Ching!
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
EuclidSo where is the grievance that seems to be the subject of this thread? The question I have is what happens when you and your family are having a picnic and some stranger shows up and starts waving at you and your family?
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
What we saw on the video was only a slight disagreement in which both sides gently confronted each other and then immediately backed down. There is nothing to indicate who was right or wrong. After the conductor’s request was made clear, Jawtooth stopped filming him and said to the camera, something to the effect that he wanted to keep filming the switching routine, but would try to avoid including the conductor.
So where is the grievance that seems to be the subject of this thread? The question I have is what happens when you and your family are having a picnic and some stranger shows up and starts waving at you and your family?
charlie hebdo Murphy Siding charlie hebdo If the two aren't in collusion, then my opinion is that the railroad employee is entitled to privacy. The YouTube guy is out of line. He should have asked permission before focusing on a person. I agree. And he should have stopped when asked politely. I wonder how many of here would have appreciated a stranger videoing us at work or play without permission? Or videoing members of your families? Frankly, it's rude and potentially creepy.
Murphy Siding charlie hebdo If the two aren't in collusion, then my opinion is that the railroad employee is entitled to privacy. The YouTube guy is out of line. He should have asked permission before focusing on a person. I agree. And he should have stopped when asked politely.
charlie hebdo If the two aren't in collusion, then my opinion is that the railroad employee is entitled to privacy. The YouTube guy is out of line. He should have asked permission before focusing on a person.
If the two aren't in collusion, then my opinion is that the railroad employee is entitled to privacy. The YouTube guy is out of line. He should have asked permission before focusing on a person.
I agree. And he should have stopped when asked politely.
I wonder how many of here would have appreciated a stranger videoing us at work or play without permission? Or videoing members of your families? Frankly, it's rude and potentially creepy.
SD70Dude n012944 This guy is on the same level that called in a CN crew for having the front door open. That guy writes for the magazine: http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/observation-tower/archive/2015/01/28/railroaders-railfans-and-the-letter.aspx
n012944 This guy is on the same level that called in a CN crew for having the front door open.
This guy is on the same level that called in a CN crew for having the front door open.
That guy writes for the magazine:
http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/observation-tower/archive/2015/01/28/railroaders-railfans-and-the-letter.aspx
Ulrich Maybe the whole thing was staged.. Brian gets more subscribers and the angry railroader shares in the profits. It's getting harder to become a millionaire with cat videos.. this is different..Brian is probably enjoying this..
Maybe the whole thing was staged.. Brian gets more subscribers and the angry railroader shares in the profits. It's getting harder to become a millionaire with cat videos.. this is different..Brian is probably enjoying this..
I doubt any of this was staged, and at 126K subs he's only bringing in about 6-8K per year in income.. If his videos are monetized that is.. Now if he had 1.26 Million subs then he could live more than comfortably.. I also agree with the conductor not wanting to be filmed. Railfans don't understand alot of aspects of the industry when it comes to personnal and what their personal or work situation maybe...
However I wouldn't have confronted the guy though. Some things are beyond our control regardless of what we do. Being filmed can be one of those things.
Sinced I missed this incident.. To the writer at this magazine who wrote a letter to CN some years back, because you couldn't get "the shot".. I hope you feel good about yourself... Over the years I've chatted with a number of T&E people and the conversations have always been pleasant. It always takes a few rotten apples to ruin the bunch..
Murphy Sidinghe should have stopped when asked politely.
I suspect that we may never know the full story behind all this. Just as was the case with Eduardo Moreno, the authorities clearly believe we couldn't handle the truth.
zugmann Since we are only seeing one side (and one video) who knows what the truth is. Somehow I doubt it is 100% as it is presented.
Since we are only seeing one side (and one video) who knows what the truth is.
Somehow I doubt it is 100% as it is presented.
chatanugaThe way I see it, if Mr. Railroader had just done his job and ignored Brian, there would be no issue since Brian wasn't on railroad property, crossing in front of the approaching train, or threatening the employee/displaying a weapon. Since Brian seemed to recognize the guy at the beginning of the video, it sounds like Mr. Railfan has a problem with railfans and needs to keep it his problem or find another job where he's not in public view.
Just a few comments...
I've seen a few of Jaw Tooth's videos and generally find them boring.
How he got that many subscribers, I'll never know.
He does a bit of preaching sometimes about his religion so this doesn't exactly match up with that.
I'm not real big on getting my picture taken, so I can understand the railroader's point of view.
diningcar Why in the hell would he be railfanning a switching move on an insignificant track that is so unimportent that there is no crossing signalling?
Why in the hell would he be railfanning a switching move on an insignificant track that is so unimportent that there is no crossing signalling?
What does that have to do with anything? Are we only supposed to railfan heavily-used mainlines or something?
I know the guy (Jawtooth) in the YouTube video through not only his YouTube channel but through his railfanning posts on Facebook. Brian's passionate about trains, posting a lot of pics and videos of the Cincinnati Eastern Terminal on the former NS Peavine Route, which runs near his home. He also posts pics and videos of lots of other locations and subjects as well.
In the video in question, Brian apparently recognizes the NS employee, who I'll refer to as Mr. Railroader, as a Norfolk Southern employee who'd called him a "loser" as he went past at some point in the past. However, that doesn't spark the issue in the video, but I'll address it later. Mr. Railroader stops his train to protect an unprotected crossing. Brian is well enough away from the track that he's clearly not trespassing. Mr. Railroader, rather than protecting the crossing for the train, leaves the job he's getting paid for to confront Brian and calls him over, going up to him, and, even though Brian has his cell phone out already, basically puts himself on camera, saying he doesn't want to be on camera.
Does Mr. Railroader do this with every railfan or everybody who has their cell phone out? What if he approached somebody who took offense at being confronted like that and decided to turn the whole thing into a physical confrontation? How would he explain to NS that while he was supposed to be doing his job, he left the railroad's property, confronted a railfan, and got slugged, all because he didn't want his picture taken?
Later in the street-running segment, Mr. Railroader again leaves railroad property to go down the street to get the license plate number off what he believes to be Brian's vehicle. Instead, he gets the plate of a vehicle belonging to somebody not even involved in the whole situation. If the plate was actually turned into law enforcement who then contact the owner of the vehicle, Mr. Railroader has now dragged an innocent party into the whole situation, falsely reporting them as trespassing on railroad property, all because he didn't want to be in a picture on somebody's cell phone.
Some folks have said that Brian was too close in the last clip of the video, but it's possible he could have had the camera on his phone zoomed in or been holding the camera out farther than he was standing (you can't see down to see where he's actually standing).
The way I see it, if Mr. Railroader had just done his job and ignored Brian, there would be no issue since Brian wasn't on railroad property, crossing in front of the approaching train, or threatening the employee/displaying a weapon. Since Brian seemed to recognize the guy at the beginning of the video, it sounds like Mr. Railfan has a problem with railfans and needs to keep it his problem or find another job where he's not in public view.
Kevin
http://chatanuga.org/RailPage.html
http://chatanuga.org/WLMR.html
Definitely a possibility in order to increase the number of views.
Euclid Here seems to be another video apparently on the same day with the same friction between him and the train crew. I would guess that this video came first because he was videoing a lot of that one trainman, tension seemed to be rising. Then in the next video, the trainman stops, gets off, and confronts the guy making the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19gqCzdlVK4 There is radio discussion about whether this is the same guy as on another day.
Here seems to be another video apparently on the same day with the same friction between him and the train crew. I would guess that this video came first because he was videoing a lot of that one trainman, tension seemed to be rising. Then in the next video, the trainman stops, gets off, and confronts the guy making the video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19gqCzdlVK4
There is radio discussion about whether this is the same guy as on another day.
He seems ok in this video.. But the crew were talking about him, and he might have stopped recording at that point. Maybe a bit of confrontation is what he was looking for to spice up his videos.
Perhaps.
BaltACD Juniata Man Balt: I disagree. My expectation in public is that I am being recorded by security cameras if I'm on the street or in a place of business. I also accept that someone may be recording something on their cell phone as I happen to walk past. That's the extent of my expectation for loss of privacy. If someone is pointing a camera directly at me and I ask them to please stop, my expectation is they will do the courteous thing and stop. Simply being in public does not give someone the right to specifically record me then post it on YouTube, especially if they have been asked to stop. To continue recording after being asked to stop is, in my opinion, a provocation. CW BaltACD When you are in public - expect to be photographed. It is 21st Century USA. Only expect privacy in private settings. You are stuck in the last century.
Juniata Man Balt: I disagree. My expectation in public is that I am being recorded by security cameras if I'm on the street or in a place of business. I also accept that someone may be recording something on their cell phone as I happen to walk past. That's the extent of my expectation for loss of privacy. If someone is pointing a camera directly at me and I ask them to please stop, my expectation is they will do the courteous thing and stop. Simply being in public does not give someone the right to specifically record me then post it on YouTube, especially if they have been asked to stop. To continue recording after being asked to stop is, in my opinion, a provocation. CW BaltACD When you are in public - expect to be photographed. It is 21st Century USA. Only expect privacy in private settings.
I disagree.
My expectation in public is that I am being recorded by security cameras if I'm on the street or in a place of business. I also accept that someone may be recording something on their cell phone as I happen to walk past. That's the extent of my expectation for loss of privacy.
If someone is pointing a camera directly at me and I ask them to please stop, my expectation is they will do the courteous thing and stop.
Simply being in public does not give someone the right to specifically record me then post it on YouTube, especially if they have been asked to stop. To continue recording after being asked to stop is, in my opinion, a provocation.
CW
BaltACD When you are in public - expect to be photographed. It is 21st Century USA. Only expect privacy in private settings.
When you are in public - expect to be photographed. It is 21st Century USA.
Only expect privacy in private settings.
You are stuck in the last century.
Juniata ManBalt: I disagree. My expectation in public is that I am being recorded by security cameras if I'm on the street or in a place of business. I also accept that someone may be recording something on their cell phone as I happen to walk past. That's the extent of my expectation for loss of privacy. If someone is pointing a camera directly at me and I ask them to please stop, my expectation is they will do the courteous thing and stop. Simply being in public does not give someone the right to specifically record me then post it on YouTube, especially if they have been asked to stop. To continue recording after being asked to stop is, in my opinion, a provocation. CW BaltACD When you are in public - expect to be photographed. It is 21st Century USA. Only expect privacy in private settings.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Balt:
Tourist railroads usually don't harass their employees and volunteers the way that Class I's do.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
On a tourist railroad, it's part and parcel of the job.
Coupla years ago I rode the (B&O) dome excursion from DC to Roanoke. I started to photograph the crew tying the car to the rear of the Amtrak train. Our guide suggested I stop because many railroaders don't like that.
In Germany, if you want to come off as a typical American rube, try photographing an individual in a crowd without their permission. In other words keep your camera moving and avoid violating someone's privacy. Makes sense to me.
Rick
rixflix aka Captain Video. Blessed be Jean Shepherd and all His works!!! Hooray for 1939, the all time movie year!!! I took that ride on the Reading but my Baby caught the Katy and left me a mule to ride.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.