YouTube joker's victims hit back (From Gazette)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting GAZETTE NEWS to 80360, or email
YouTube joker's victims hit back
12:36pm Tuesday 12th February 2013 in News
A YOUTUBE prankster has been criticised by his victims for not getting their permission to film them.
Dave Mateer's videos, which show him faking a fit and contorting his face while discussing purchases with staff in Colchester stores such as Asda, Sainsbury's and B&Q, were uploaded on Friday.
In just three days, Mr Mateer, 24, of Stanway, had attracted more than 12,000 views.
But now his victims have complained, saying they had not given permission to be filmed.
One victim said: "I was not approached by him in any way and to have my face on YouTube is an invasion of my privacy.
"I am furious."
SEE WEDNESDAY'S GAZETTE FOR THE FULL STORY
Comments(34)
thecapedcrusader69
says...
12:56pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Feisty CBC wrote:Well put that's exactly what I thought
You have to get permission when filming on private premises.
Seems as though this "joker" has upset quite a few people in a sorry attempt at being funny.
wormshero
says...
12:57pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Must admit, I'm slightly amused that the gazette has made a deal of this, 12k views isn't a huge number to begin with.
DelA
says...
1:03pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Surely, it should have been getting their permission to "Show the film, after he filmed them" if he had asked them before..............
..well you work it out.
BraveDave
says...
1:45pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Mr Honest
says...
2:37pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Feisty CBC
says...
2:56pm Tue 12 Feb 13
BraveDave
says...
2:57pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Jue_uk
says...
3:17pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Feisty CBC wrote:Well written :-)
You have to get permission when filming on private premises.
Seems as though this "joker" has upset quite a few people in a sorry attempt at being funny.
terryg
says...
4:35pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Comedy genius. So a dozy chav mocking people and harassing people at work counts as humour now ?
Sounds more like bullying to me.
jaystepney
says...
5:28pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Chatty_me!
says...
5:53pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Cleggeron
says...
5:56pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Feisty CBC
says...
6:44pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Jue_uk wrote:Very kind of you to say so. Thankyou.
Feisty CBC wrote:Well written :-)
You have to get permission when filming on private premises.
Seems as though this "joker" has upset quite a few people in a sorry attempt at being funny.
Cookiemonster15
says...
9:18pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Jue_uk
says...
8:23am Wed 13 Feb 13
irememberwhen
says...
10:48am Wed 13 Feb 13
Red Tape 2
says...
11:07am Wed 13 Feb 13
Bad Bill
says...
12:23pm Wed 13 Feb 13
Red Tape 2 wrote:Not really. You can film in public places, but the supermarkets are private property and you need the owner permission to film. I'm Sure the people on candid camera had to give their permission before being shown on tv.
Isn't it just a modern version of Candid Camera?
ColchesterBelgian
says...
1:17pm Wed 13 Feb 13
Good luck in your quest to find Youtube fame.
But a word of warning, you are probably already too late.
jag99
says...
1:19pm Wed 13 Feb 13
You don't need permission from people to take their picture. Although the 1998 Human Rights Act made it easier to protect your privacy in certain ways, there's no actual free standing right to privacy in this country. Obviously though it's worth seeking a person's permission out of common courtesy.
However aggressive use of photography/video cameras can be dealt with under harassment laws, but this requires you to have been targeted on at least two occassions.
Surb
says...
1:24pm Wed 13 Feb 13
BraveDave says...
2:57pm Tue 12 Feb 13
There's a name for people like you. Keyboard Warrior. Speaking their mind, doing whats write for the world, making a difference, demanding change... All behind a computer screen haha you loser. ... doing what's write? LMAO its "Right" not "Write"
and...
Cookiemonster15 says...
9:18pm Tue 12 Feb 13
are all you lot mad a guy goes into a super market and b and q and films himself doing a random thing to make people laugh and spread a weird form of joy to other people yes its a bit stupid but i for one found it rather funny just to see the peoples reactions it isn't bullying at all he wasn't directly taking the mic out of these people in question it was a reaction thing. and to be fair the lady in Sainsbury's was the only 1 that asked him if he was all right no one else did they didn't know he didn't actually have a problem so who is making themselves not look very good now????
A few comma's and fullstops wouldn't hurt.
Surb
says...
1:27pm Wed 13 Feb 13
O rly?
says...
1:29pm Wed 13 Feb 13
Nor do you need express permission to film on a camera phone etc in a shop or public place.
Walk around a shop filming things with your phone, see what happens...
This really shouldn't be news, this sort of stuff happens on a daily basis, all over the world. No-one really cares, and it's certainly not going to act as a stepping stone.
jammin
says...
1:35pm Wed 13 Feb 13
Pot and kettle me thinks. It's "grammar & punctuation".
wormshero
says...
1:54pm Wed 13 Feb 13
O rly? wrote:"Nor do you need express permission to film on a camera phone etc in a shop or public place. Walk around a shop filming things with your phone, see what happens..."
He doesn't need permission from the individuals at all.
Nor do you need express permission to film on a camera phone etc in a shop or public place.
Walk around a shop filming things with your phone, see what happens...
This really shouldn't be news, this sort of stuff happens on a daily basis, all over the world. No-one really cares, and it's certainly not going to act as a stepping stone.
While not often enforced a place of work isn't treated as a public place where you can film whoever you want, and is somewhere where people can expect privacy, so landowners permission would be expected. In recent court cases judges have actually argued further saying even with the owners permission the people recorded could expect privacy (this was in the case of customers rather than staff, mind you). Arguably I guess the people shot could claim that the videos are defaming them, in which case a release should be obtained otherwise there's potential legal avenues to sue. There's also potential that without permission it's breaking data protection law prohibiting recording of data which identifies an individual. CCTV falls under this category, for example, and isn't usually available for public release.
It's kind of a grey area in general, but as the intention is (according to the last article) to profit from defaming other people it's hardly like the people filmed couldn't take legal action.
It's amusing that this is even news, but heh, whatever, I find it interesting to see peoples interpretations of the law on this matter anyway.
romantic
says...
2:24pm Wed 13 Feb 13
Blonde bel
says...
4:20pm Wed 13 Feb 13
Jue_uk
says...
9:23am Thu 14 Feb 13
Blonde bel wrote:The link below may be of help to you if you are one of the unfortunate innocent members of staff in any of Mr Mateers video clips on YouTube.
This guy says that he informs his victims that he asked them after he has finished filming well that is a complete LIE, and yes I know it was for a laugh but you should ask the person if its ok to put it on YouTube some people do not want to be plastered all over the web.
http://support.googl
e.com/youtube/bin/an
swer.py?hl=en&answer
=126263
the mighty wah
says...
12:16pm Sun 17 Feb 13
jut1972
says...
3:07pm Sun 17 Feb 13
Then go "oh". If it was offensive and funny its still funny, but it's just lazy and uninventive crap.
icecoolmark
says...
3:51pm Sun 17 Feb 13
Boris
says...
8:07pm Sun 17 Feb 13
icecoolmark wrote:No racism please.
the only reason these employees probably didn't want to be shown on youtube is because they were working & signing on at the same time.... polish or albanians.Otherwise, lighten up.
bill60
says...
10:51am Thu 21 Feb 13
Feisty CBC says...
12:49pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Seems as though this "joker" has upset quite a few people in a sorry attempt at being funny.