Punters using recording devices in sessions without concent

I be heard first hand from a WL who did an out all with a shop regular only to catch him red handed filming her undress and while sucking his cock... She insisted that he delete it.

ADVICE TO WOULD BE FILM MAKERS: If you want to film a session, ask for permission. If you get off on the hidden cam thing; ask permission and the fake the hidden cam scenario. Most amateur porn you see is in fact professional porn. You think all on screen murders In horror films are real?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AHLUNGOR

It will be much harder for an outcall girl to protect herself when she is visiting at the clients hotel room. He can just set up all the recording devices and the WL will have no chance !

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goulash

I be heard first hand from a WL who did an out all with a shop regular only to catch him red handed filming her undress and while sucking his cock... She insisted that he delete it.

ADVICE TO WOULD BE FILM MAKERS: If you want to film a session, ask for permission. If you get off on the hidden cam thing; ask permission and the fake the hidden cam scenario. Most amateur porn you see is in fact professional porn. You think all on screen murders In horror films are real?

---

Well said ! ;) ;) ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by babelx

sun glasses in teh shower and in a dark room? I am surprised he could see anything at all??! That is the peak of wierdness!

---

It's not a brothel. Incall/outcall apartments and hotels are not as dark as you think. Even in brothels, these things happen, recording devices don't need too much light nowadays !

A despicable act ... how would these men feel if a WL/ML was filming them without their knowledge?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will2shy

A despicable act ... how would these men feel if a WL/ML was filming them without their knowledge?

---

which makes me wonder ....
how much security cam footage is being recorded inside rooms ??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wilisno

It's not a brothel. Incall/outcall apartments and hotels are not as dark as you think. Even in brothels, these things happen, recording devices don't need too much light nowadays !

---

It's illegal, whether it's in a brothel or not. It is against the law to record -video or voice - anyone, anywhere, in any circumstance, unless prior permission is sought. End of story. And, if my understanding of the law is correct, one has an obligation to inform the police if one knows of an illegal activity.

One of my old regulars used to tell me there were several punters who tried to photograph her. It was the part of her job she hated the most, she said. I told her that she did not have to put up with it and ought to tell her mamasan. She replied, in Chinese: "I'd just lose my job if I did." One really has to feel for these women; they are under immense stress and face this sort of intimidation on a daily basis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayne

It's illegal, whether it's in a brothel or not. It is against the law to record -video or voice - anyone, anywhere, in any circumstance, unless prior permission is sought. End of story. And, if my understanding of the law is correct, one has an obligation to inform the police if one knows of an illegal activity.

---

I think you're overreaching a bit there Wayne. We are recorded all over the place without prior permission, you can't walk down the street in the city without being recorded.

You may have a point about places where there is an expectation of privacy, say a toilet, change room, your room in a hotel, or a room in a brothel, but elsewhere is open slather.

These guys are arseholes though, and make it harder for the rest of us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jrbarry

I think you're overreaching a bit there Wayne. We are recorded all over the place without prior permission, you can't walk down the street in the city without being recorded.

---

Yeah, but isn't there something about torts or something - I obviously have little knowledge of law - that's implies a social contract. You accept the social contract by being a citizen, so accept the tenor of the laws. And under our Westminister system, one is innocent unless proven guilty of a crime. This carries through to all applications of the law. The survellance cameras in the streets, for example, are there to prevent crime; not there per se to record you. But you are correct, it is a fuzzy definition that I have never been quite able to get my head around. I don't think there is anything fuzzy about secretively recording a sexual interaction - it is simply illegal. Some things that are illegal are still socially acceptable (generally moral behaviour) but there is nothing even socially acceptable about stealing somebody else's privacy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayne

It is against the law to record -video or voice - anyone, anywhere, in any circumstance, unless prior permission is sought. End of story.

---

You may only be referring to the sexual context here Wayne, and if so, you is correct. But just for the sake of public enlightenment, in a public place you are free to record / film / photograph whoever and whatever you like, anyone, anywhere in any circumstance. That is why we have essential social documentary / recorded history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sextus

You may only be referring to the sexual context here Wayne, and if so, you is correct. But just for the sake of public enlightenment, in a public place you are free to record / film / photograph whoever and whatever you like, anyone, anywhere in any circumstance. That is why we have essential social documentary / recorded history.

---

I'm not sure you are correct Sextus. I think laws have been changed in the name of antiterrorism and child protection; and in the interests of commercial property. I've got two personal anecdotes.
One, a former colleague of mine was arrested on Coogee Beach for filming surfers. The police charged him with filming minors. It was thrown out of court, but his career was finished.
Two, an acquaintance was fined for photographing the harbour bridge from the opera house. He is a professional journalist and the maritime board said he breached their copyright over the harbour shores - you are not allowed to photograph Sydney Harbour without permission.
I know these examples aren't exactly what you are talking about, both say that one needs to be very careful when recording.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sextus

You may only be referring to the sexual context here Wayne, and if so, you is correct. But just for the sake of public enlightenment, in a public place you are free to record / film / photograph whoever and whatever you like, anyone, anywhere in any circumstance. That is why we have essential social documentary / recorded history.

---

Not totally true Sextus.

There are many public areas where you cannot take a photo of a person without their written permission, such as a beach, park or a school. Often this has nought to do with "privacy" and more to do with you being a "nuisance". You may not be arrested, but your equipment may be confiscated and you will be moved on.

The situation that Wayne refers to with his friend who is a professional journalist is that he would be in breech of copyright as he would be making money from his images/video. The average tourist taking photos/videos of the environment (note, not people) for private use in a public place will be fine. This does not apply to all public areas BTW.

In any case, none of this has anything to do with the situation in this thread. Beyond any doubt, recording someone in a sexual situation without their permission in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy (which includes a brothel, hotel room, private residence etc) is illegal.

These are all outlined in the following articles:
http://www.artslaw.com.au/info-sheet...aphers-rights/
http://www.artslaw.com.au/info-sheet...public-places/
and
http://www.lawstuff.org.au/wa_law/topics/article10

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uglyphil

Not totally true Sextus.

There are many public areas where you cannot take a photo of a person without their written permission, such as a beach, park or a school. Often this has nought to do with "privacy" and more to do with you being a "nuisance". You may not be arrested, but your equipment may be confiscated and you will be moved on.

The situation that Wayne refers to with his friend who is a professional journalist is that he would be in breech of copyright as he would be making money from his images/video. The average tourist taking photos/videos of the environment (note, not people) for private use in a public place will be fine. This does not apply to all public areas BTW.

In any case, none of this has anything to do with the situation in this thread. Beyond any doubt, recording someone in a sexual situation without their permission in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy (which includes a brothel, hotel room, private residence etc) is illegal.

These are all outlined in the following articles:
http://www.artslaw.com.au/info-sheet...aphers-rights/
http://www.artslaw.com.au/info-sheet...public-places/
and
http://www.lawstuff.org.au/wa_law/topics/article10

---

And also the photos and footage should not be published without permission from the subject.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wilisno

And also the photos and footage should not be published without permission from the subject.

---

If you are going to use them for a commercial purpose, then yes, that is true also.

About 30 years ago some friends and I were playing soccer in a park on the foreshores of Balmain, most of us were in bathers only. Two people (male and female) showed up asked if they could photograph us for NSW Tourism. We said sure, and continued our game (I actually broke the photographer's nose when he got too close to the action, I forgot he was there and backed into him going for a header). Afterwards, they got us to sign releases, which we were happy to do.

I think's it's wrong and just plain stupid.

There are WL who offer the service but of course for your use only. Some maybe not.

But to do it as hidden and sneaky way, I find it down right just well , I consider you and I don't just say this as keyboard warrior type. But I think I'd rather knock you out, because clearly a really wimpy type of pussy bastard who looks at children. That's my opinon on those who do such a thing.

I remember going into a high end place in Las Vegas - they search you pat down and metal detector and then they run this radio thing over you. this was just a very private gambling/many WL around type event. Put it this way, the nails in my R/M Williams set off this pad, I had to take them off once inspected. moved on.

Not saying it will ever get that way but, who's to say it won't one day.
Just because a select few have to ruin it for the rest.
I know it's a bit issue for the girls on call outs and risk they take.
Hopefully some of owners consider some further measures.

Once I've had the fortune of a WL actually taking my phone and starting to record the session. That was nice! I doubt that would ever happen again.... I think most will know who I am talking about.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by babelx

Once I've had the fortune of a WL actually taking my phone and starting to record the session. That was nice! I doubt that would ever happen again.... I think most will know who I am talking about.....

---

there was a service on cracker that allowed recording with consent.. works if u want to see you in sort of a porn video
doesn't appeal me much

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zucon

there was a service on cracker that allowed recording with consent.. works if u want to see you in sort of a porn video
doesn't appeal me much

---

yes it said she will wear a mask! LOL.

Those cracker ads though. Never believe them. You'd get a pork chop who looks like they are on druuugz. I've walked away many times but also been duped many times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayne

I'm not sure you are correct Sextus. I think laws have been changed in the name of antiterrorism and child protection; and in the interests of commercial property. I've got two personal anecdotes.
One, a former colleague of mine was arrested on Coogee Beach for filming surfers. The police charged him with filming minors. It was thrown out of court, but his career was finished.

---

How did it get to court? No wonder it was thrown out. Google Luna Park images (for example) and look at the avalanche of innocent photos of children being themselves. Minors in photographs is merely capturing public reality. The polices' highest purpose is to protect rights, not abuse them. In this case they should be better advised by their superiors, as they are subject to civil suits for wrongful arrest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayne

Two, an acquaintance was fined for photographing the harbour bridge from the opera house. He is a professional journalist and the maritime board said he breached their copyright over the harbour shores - you are not allowed to photograph Sydney Harbour without permission.

---

Suppose you use a telephoto lens and get shots of the harbour from Potts Point? :shout:

There was a report in the paper the other day at Barangaroo where Ken Duncan, AO, called the bluff of Sydney Harbour rangers who tried to prevent him taking photos. They threatened to call the police on this Order of Australia guy. He replied: "Bring it on. I can't wait to see tomorrow's headline: "Ken Duncan arrested for taking photos." :shout: A police officer said he'd come, sure - "to shake Duncan's hand."

It is just money grubbing council bullshit and toothless intimidation. Everyone has a civic duty to ignore them.

I heard that the firmware on mobile phones sold in Australia have the camera shutter sound built into them to prevent people talking photos/filming without consent. The sound on my old phone was pretty annoying and realised that I couldn't switch it off.

In terms of taking photos or video in public, in general I think it's legal unless you have caused some harm by taking the photo i.e. copyright in terms of a performance or nuisance in the case of taking pictures of other people.

I think I saw on the news that specific laws were introduced to make 'upskirting' illegal as well.

But what do you guys think about being filmed yourselves? I know for sure some places have security cameras. One time a girl told me she saw me walking in on the camera and I was a little shocked as I'd never thought of this before.

Yes. anything found to be done for sexual or prurient reasons is justly right out. The evidence for wrongdoing is in the content of the photo itself. An innocent photo, no matter the subject matter, is defence all by itself.

Those upskirt guys are a bit of a laugh though. The photo is, funnily enough, always completely anonymous! :shout:

Anyone taking photos of people and being a nuisance is only going to get photos of people looking annoyed. A self-defeating exercise.