In one victim statement, it was written like this:
quote: The woman told police he made the hair on the back of her neck stand up.
I did not realize that "making-the-hair-on-someone's-neck-stand-up" was illegal, as I'm sure many guys have done that to a hot chick at one time or another.
[ January 02, 2017, 03:11 AM: Message edited by: TruthBeTold ]
Posted by 5thgear (Member # 46148) on :
Yes a person can get into trouble since it's against the law to film someone without their consent. Now getting caught doing it is another story. It seems like he was asking to get caught. It's one thing to cautiously get candid vid while standing behind a woman in a line or even at a coffee shop, but following them where they can notice you recording is stupid. While I don't think it's a crime and creepy to compliment women on their feet, this is yet another story to remind me that it's best to not approach women telling them how their feet turn me on. That can come out later on after getting to know them and they feel comfortable around me.
Posted by Toes2Nose1969 (Member # 47961) on :
It makes the rest of us foot guys look bad.
Posted by solefull00 (Member # 44401) on :
it sure does. discretion and common sense go a long way
Posted by footexhibit (Member # 1664) on :
Just another reason for people to think all foot guys are creepy. Of course we are not all alike, but living in a world where everything is prejudged, things like this does not help.
Posted by footboy1 (Member # 4549) on :
quote:Originally posted by Toes2Nose1969: It makes the rest of us foot guys look bad.
I have seen this said many times on this forum and I have been thinking. What if the guy had instead been caught taking candid pics and videos up these girl's skirts or down their shirts? Would it make other guys look bad who like pussy, ass and tits?
Please know I am not AT ALL defending what this guy did, but it is a serious question.
-footboy1
Posted by TruthBeTold (Member # 47114) on :
quote:Originally posted by footexhibit: Of course we are not all alike
Exactly! That guy was a real pervert and a freak! Posted by footexhibit (Member # 1664) on :
quote:Originally posted by footboy1:
quote:Originally posted by Toes2Nose1969: It makes the rest of us foot guys look bad.
I have seen this said many times on this forum and I have been thinking. What if the guy had instead been caught taking candid pics and videos up these girl's skirts or down their shirts? Would it make other guys look bad who like pussy, ass and tits?
Please know I am not AT ALL defending what this guy did, but it is a serious question.
-footboy1
very good point, I always wonder stuff like that too, as foot men are no different then tit men or ass men. the problem is we are looked at different than men who like tits and ass. a guy taking candids of women's tits and ass is kinda expected, and sometimes would not even get this kind of reaction from women as they are used it.
because people think foot men are from another planet they react a different way. what we like is and always will be exaggerated by those who are against it.
Posted by silverstar (Member # 50226) on :
It's too bad some people have no control and take things too far. While most of reactions of people who found out about me were positive, there were some who were grossed out and disgusted.
Posted by LeDaemon (Member # 198) on :
Its an invasion of privacy. According to the article he had been banned from Panera Bread by a district manager for filming customers feet.
He apparently has done this enough and indiscreetly enough to make women feel threatened. It says that he dude followed her out to her car when she left and started talking to her about her feet. They planted an undercover female officer to catch him in the act. That's how notorious this guy was in these businesses.
Posted by NorcalfeetStudios (Member # 732) on :
Depends on if the state you're in is 1 or 2 party consent and if it's private property or not.
Posted by Rider Aldebaran (Member # 38525) on :
quote:Originally posted by footboy1:
quote:Originally posted by Toes2Nose1969: It makes the rest of us foot guys look bad.
I have seen this said many times on this forum and I have been thinking. What if the guy had instead been caught taking candid pics and videos up these girl's skirts or down their shirts? Would it make other guys look bad who like pussy, ass and tits?
Please know I am not AT ALL defending what this guy did, but it is a serious question.
-footboy1
Less so, because people generally have a more positive view of finding breasts, asses, and vaginas attractive, while liking feet is very polarizing, especially when stuff like this happens.
Posted by Patrick (Member # 1169) on :
quote:Originally posted by 5thgear: Yes a person can get into trouble since it's against the law to film someone without their consent.
That is not entirely true. This is how paparazzi get away with things. If you're shooting on public property, you can actually photograph whatever you want. This is also why cops cannot stop people from filming them arresting people. I had a cop demand my camera when I pulled over to shoot a photo of a cop car that had struck another car and then ended up on a large snow mound years ago when working for the newspaper. I told him he couldn't as I was on public property and behind his police tape. He gave me a look, but knew he had no grounds to stand on.
Patrick
Posted by Pjay (Member # 35692) on :
quote:Originally posted by 5thgear: [QB] Yes a person can get into trouble since it's against the law to film someone without their consent.
I'm not sure that's accurate to say. I'm not a legal expert, but I'm pretty sure that "it's against the law to film someone without their consent" is far from a universally true statement. It would depend entirely on the venue and circumstances.
For example, it is fully NOT illegal to record or photograph people when out in public. Obviously, it is not permissible in places where people have a presumption of privacy. And I'm sure there's plenty of other legal nuance depending on the municipal jurisdiction.
Posted by Pjay (Member # 35692) on :
quote:Originally posted by LeDaemon: Its an invasion of privacy. According to the article he had been banned from Panera Bread by a district manager for filming customers feet.
He apparently has done this enough and indiscreetly enough to make women feel threatened. It says that he dude followed her out to her car when she left and started talking to her about her feet. They planted an undercover female officer to catch him in the act. That's how notorious this guy was in these businesses.
Then it sounds like it was more of a trespassing issue than an issue of "illegally recording" anyone.
Posted by Pjay (Member # 35692) on :
quote:Originally posted by footexhibit: Just another reason for people to think all foot guys are creepy. Of course we are not all alike, but living in a world where everything is prejudged, things like this does not help.
I have met several women who, prior to meeting me, had negative experiences with foot fetishists in their lives and the creepy, over-the-top behavior of the men had left them with bad impressions of guys who have foot fetishes. I think that in such instances, it's important for us to tread carefully and gently and be mindful of correcting those prejudices that have been emplaced by these women's bad experiences.
Posted by 5thgear (Member # 46148) on :
It's legal to film people in public, but they have the right to know why they're being filmed. What this guy did pertains to voyeurism laws, but it hits a gray area bc it was feet. Plus, he got booked for stalking. I'm sure there's more to this story. What makes it unique is that it pertains to feet which are legal to bare in public. In a way, this story seems to normalize feet as a sexual part.
There are states with voyeurism laws that prohibit the filming of intimate areas even in public. There are even states that considered public upskirting to be legal until recent years past. So it varies by state and scenario.
Like I said, I'm sure there's more to this story. Maybe the guy harassed them after they told him to leave them alone, or maybe they're out to make him a villain bc of his foot fetish when he harmlessly came on to them.
What we have to realize or remember is that this kind of behavior whether it's t&a or feet is considered low and creepy by women. Men who get upskirt or candid tit pics aren't applauded by the masses, and I'd bet you a lot that most women wouldn't find it cute.
[ January 04, 2017, 01:01 PM: Message edited by: 5thgear ]
Posted by scribe (Member # 48938) on :
quote:Originally posted by Patrick: If you're shooting on public property, you can actually photograph whatever you want. This is also why cops cannot stop people from filming them arresting people.
In the United States, this is exactly right. What you can and can't do has nothing to do with obtaining permission.
If you are in a public place, anything you can see with the naked eye, generally speaking, is fair game to be photographed.
There are exceptions if you go to extremes (such as standing on a ladder to peer into a bedroom window from a street corner), but you're otherwise fine, generally.
Just understand what legally constitutes a public space. A city sidewalk? Yes. A parking lot? No. A municipal building? Yes. A restaurant? No.
Bottom line, shorthand version: If someone other than a government entity owns the property, they can make the rules and you do not have the legal right to take photos.
The whole "permission" thing potentially kicks in if you do something with the photos -- selling them, for example, or using them in advertising where the person(s) is/are prominent and identifiable. Bottom line, shorthand version: It gets tricky if you do something more with the pics than enjoy them privately.
[ January 07, 2017, 10:12 PM: Message edited by: scribe ]
Posted by scribe (Member # 48938) on :
quote:Originally posted by 5thgear: It's legal to film people in public, but they have the right to know why they're being filmed.
Wrong.
In the United States, you're not legally obligated to tell them anything. As long as you're in what's legally defined as a public space (a street, a city park, a municipal building) and you're not being a nuisance, it's your right to film or photograph nearly any goddamned thing you see, for any reason.
Morally obligated? That's another matter, maybe.
Posted by NorcalfeetStudios (Member # 732) on :
quote:Originally posted by scribe:
quote:Originally posted by 5thgear: It's legal to film people in public, but they have the right to know why they're being filmed.
Wrong.
In the United States, you're not legally obligated to tell them anything. As long as you're in what's legally defined as a public space (a street, a city park, a municipal building) and you're not being a nuisance, it's your right to film or photograph nearly any goddamned thing you see, for any reason.
Morally obligated? That's another matter, maybe.
Except when you're shooting a model in a city park. City workers can ask for a permit if need be and at their discretion if they want to and guess what, the permit is the only thing that will let you stay taking pictures in the park, if you don't have one..bye bye! Luckily my spots I've only been asked once. I find most don't know the law or it's loop holes.
Posted by AsianFootLove (Member # 43116) on :
Super question. I assume it first depends on your local laws. Usually, public places do not protect you with a guarantee of privacy. The owner of an area or legal "enforcer" may ask you to leave, if it's viewed as harassment. I believe if you are filming/picturing within what is considered "decent", such as no boob, no up the skirt shots, I assume it's most likely legal. Now if you were to announce you get sexual fullfilment from this, you might have trouble. P.S. This is my opinion, I'm not a lawyer.
Posted by scribe (Member # 48938) on :
This is correct. Commercial shoots generally fall under different rules.
quote:Originally posted by NorcalfeetStudios:
quote:Originally posted by scribe:
quote:Originally posted by 5thgear: It's legal to film people in public, but they have the right to know why they're being filmed.
Wrong.
In the United States, you're not legally obligated to tell them anything. As long as you're in what's legally defined as a public space (a street, a city park, a municipal building) and you're not being a nuisance, it's your right to film or photograph nearly any goddamned thing you see, for any reason.
Morally obligated? That's another matter, maybe.
Except when you're shooting a model in a city park. City workers can ask for a permit if need be and at their discretion if they want to and guess what, the permit is the only thing that will let you stay taking pictures in the park, if you don't have one..bye bye! Luckily my spots I've only been asked once. I find most don't know the law or it's loop holes.
Posted by John Jones (Member # 50531) on :
Legal issues notwithstanding, if you are taking secret videos/photos of women in public you are being a rude a$$hole.
If you want photos of cute feet that bad and don't have a wife/girlfriend to indulge your fetish, try visiting a large, liberal, college campus and use a polite approach to taking consensual photos. There are tons of guys on youtube who are surprisingly successful in doing this.
Posted by reinforcedtoemo (Member # 28066) on :
So what about these Candid Clip4sale movies, how can you know if the women in these candid clip are of legal age.
Posted by scribe (Member # 48938) on :
quote:Originally posted by reinforcedtoemo: So what about these Candid Clip4sale movies, how can you know if the women in these candid clip are of legal age.
I'm not sure you can. Although if you're wrestling with that moral question, perhaps it's worth wrestling with the moral question of this style of video overall.
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Mad]](cuss.gif)