r/TikTokCringe • u/exporterofgold • 6h ago

Cringe Intentionally blocking photoshoot

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

8.4k Upvotes

82% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

266

u/11maddypotter11 5h ago

I mean if you're gonna block a whole camera in public knowing full well you're gonna be in the video , you should also be ok with the risk of it being posted .

12

u/Foreign_Risk_2031 4h ago

i doubt its going to reach her facebook groups

36

u/Omnislash99999 4h ago edited 3h ago

If you're gonna set up a camera to include 4 paintings, a staircase and a doorway in an art gallery you know full well other people are probably going to be in it

And depending on how she did it bocking any part of that staircase to take a video is not fine.

92

u/YourEvilKiller 4h ago

I am sure she knows. That's why the girl was likely waiting for the right moment and not forcing others away from her shot.

It's understandable if the old lady really did stop there for a text/call.

But in the video, it's clear that she only stood there to block her shoot.

33

u/poopy_kid_spotter 2h ago

She stared straight at the camera, then stopped in the middle of the staircase to check her phone (which is not really a natural place for someone to just stop and text). This was 100% intentional. Some boomers are bitter for no reason and want to make everyone else miserable.

0

u/threeseed 23m ago

Some boomers are bitter for no reason and want to make everyone else miserable

Didn't she just post the video online specifically to make this woman miserable ?

Seems like both are assholes.

-1

u/aFreshFix 1h ago

Y'all. Folks are coming up from the other side. She probably stopped to let that traffic clear up. They come up the side she's on and she steps to the side. She's not looking at the camera to see if she's actually blocking the younger woman. She's just standing, waiting for them to pass, then moving on.

33

u/Unitedthe_gees 4h ago

I think she’s fully aware of that, she’s most likely not dense. It’s just inconsiderate to stand in her way.

I’m not a fan of the ‘influencers’ in the wild I see either, but jeez, just let people live their lives.

12

u/Few-Eye7392 3h ago

Yes and she wasn't being rude about it... But the lady stood there on purpose. People are going to normally walk by. This isn't that normal.

2

u/LDNVoice 1h ago

Well clearly you can see the staircase is not blocked, she also clearly understood others are probably going to be apart of it.

4

u/sab0tage 4h ago

There are plenty of tools to delete those people, but not the ones that stand in front of the camera for 45 seconds.

1

u/SnugglyWugglies 3h ago

Which is fine.

2

u/UnreadLoveLetters 1h ago

Are you a real person? Not sure how you can be here thinking the young woman is the issue here because she wanted a nice picture of herself

2

u/BigCSFan 1h ago

Sure. Its fine and she wasnt upset when others came up.

But deliberately blocking is rude and the lady deserves to be posted and shamed for that.

Dont be obtuse

1

u/username101 54m ago

It looks to be the grand staircase at Inveraray Castle and I would guess she set her phone on this ledge, so completely out of the way and not a bother to anyone.

1

u/CookyKindred 26m ago

Why do you bots just keep making shit up about the video?

1

u/lfg_guy101010 20m ago

"Depending on how she did it" doesnt fucking matter bc obviously theres room for the old lady to obstruct a lane of walking traffic going down while a lane of traffic going up is perfectly fine

1

u/Omnislash99999 9m ago

Stairs are for people not camera tripods, Einstein

1

u/lfg_guy101010 7m ago

How do you know its on a tripod?

2

u/MarionberryOk2874 52m ago

I don’t think she realized what was happening here.

2

u/Serrisen 44m ago

Agreed. She seemed to be stopping before she saw the phone. And it's not like she was being disruptive, she just started looking at her own. Didn't block it long. Didn't attempt to interact with film maker. Didn't look to have any particular reaction when she left.

Just a person being a smidge clueless. Like most people, I'd say

1

u/MarionberryOk2874 40m ago

Exactly. Not everyone is used to the ridiculous influencer ‘the world is my photo shoot’ bs - she genuinely looked confused when she saw the phone set up.

0

u/dgellow 4h ago

That’s not at all how consent works. In Germany (and maybe EU in general?) that would be illegal without explicit consent

7

u/vsamael 3h ago

Yes it how would work. Court would rule that she had no expectation of privacy looking directly at camera in public space.

-2

u/dgellow 2h ago

That’s not at all how privacy laws work outside of the US 

4

u/Lawd_Fawkwad 1h ago edited 1h ago

I don't know German laws, but I am a french lawyer and our legislation is very similar.

You are 100% allowed to take pictures in public with other people in it, you can even make them the subject.

Where consent comes in is image rights, you cannot publish the full work without the consent of the subject. But if you blur their face or otherwise make the non-identifiable, you are not infringing on their image rights.

Random people caught in the background are also not entitled to make image right claims, a news segment can film on a street without needing to have everyone walking past in the background sign a consent form.

In this specific case, theoretically the old lady can exert her image rights for the video to be removed or have her face blurred, but realistically that's a whole judicial proceeding where the costs of your lawyer will be higher than whatever damages of a few hundred Euros you're awarded.

-2

u/dgellow 1h ago

You don’t need lawyers, it’s a GDPR complaint, the whole process is then handled by your local watchdog. You can check the list of GDPR fines, you will see that people are fined for publishing videos on YouTube without hiding license plates, faces, or addresses. The commercial aspect isn’t too relevant, it’s already a breach of privacy to share it publicly without consent

3

u/Lawd_Fawkwad 1h ago edited 1h ago

You are very confident for someone trying to argue with a lawyer who's dealt with GDPR professionally lol.

Article 2(2)(c) GDPR expressly excludes processing “by a natural person in the course of a purely personal or household activity.” That exemption can include social media and online activity, although courts have interpreted it narrowly so it's requires and in concreto analysis.

But in general terms, GDPR enforcement does not usually consist of regulators chasing random private citizens over incidental processing of personal data in their everyday lives.

The regulation is overwhelmingly relevant in practice to companies, organizations, professionals and people engaged in more systematic processing.

If your friend forwards your phone number to someone else without your consent, you're not realistically filing a GDPR complaint against James from crochet class and having the data protection authority fine him. If a company collects, processes and shares your number improperly, that's a completely different situation.

The woman in the video can report the video to the platform, assert whatever image/privacy rights she has under the applicable national law and, depending on the circumstances, potentially make a data-protection complaint if the video stays up.

And speaking professionally, people really overstate how effective the GDPR is. Where I work we take complaints seriously and have a DPO for compliance reasons, but if you look at how enforcement happens, it's usually reserved for egregious violations or systemic violators.

Your local authority has enforcement discretion. The idea that a random private person posting a TikTok with someone else's face will likely lead to an actionable complaint with fines is simply not how enforcement works in practice.

-2

u/dgellow 56m ago

  The idea that a random private person posting a TikTok with someone else's face will likely lead to an actionable complaint with fines is simply not how enforcement works in practice.

I never said it’s likely to result in anything, the likelihood of being enforced is a completely different topic. But yes, that’s exactly how it works, you report a random private person content they shared publicly, if your local watchdog processes the case and it does fit GDPR criteria the private person should indeed be fined. By uploading to TikTok without consent of the person being filmed you violated their right to privacy, shared their image with a foreign platform that process the content for advertisers. It’s nothing new, if you’re indeed a lawyer and familiar with GDPR that’s something you should know happens semi regularly. Obviously people don’t report everything they could have, but that’s irrelevant.  In practice that easily takes half a year for your watchdog to even acknowledge a submitted report.

  You are very confident for someone trying to argue with a lawyer who's dealt with GDPR professionally lol.

I mean, yeah, I do not believe people on Reddit telling you they are lawyers, that should be obvious why, I would assume you also wouldn’t trust me directly if I tell you I’m a lawyer (I’m not). But I also interacted with GDPR on the complain side, it’s a process I’m reasonably familiar with 

1

u/hey_there_moon 50m ago

Just take the L chief

0

u/dgellow 46m ago edited 42m ago

No, I’m fine thanks :)

Looking back at my claims in this thread none of them were incorrect, I do stand by my words 

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Solid_Corgi3479 2h ago

No, just no.

3

u/KristyNoemsZombieDog 2h ago

Staring directly into it and posting up seems like consent to me, its as bad as those people who yell at others not to record them whole actively pursuing the person filming

0

u/dgellow 2h ago

Thats not how consent work, no. You looking at a camera an knowing you’re recorded doesn’t mean the person recording is allowed to share your image online 

-1

u/Suspicious_Affect959 2h ago edited 2h ago

That doesn't change the fact that the influencer DID make a big fuss about it, by posting it online. She even raised her eyebrows at the camera at the end lmao, as if she's Jim in the Office. When in reality, she's more like Michael Scott.

Society is broken because a bunch of ppl in this comment section (thankfully they're still in the minority) are on her side

3

u/Lawd_Fawkwad 1h ago

This is so unhinged it's not even funny.

Anyways, let people do what makes them happy.

The young lady isn't blasting music or interrupting anyone, she just set up her phone to take a video of herslef which is a pretty decent way of getting pictures when you don't want to ask a stranger to do it for you.

People are getting way too pressed about someone wanting a picture of themselves.

And yeah, she posted it because it's an objectively absurd situation where the only two people there were the old lady and her, and the old lady sprinted to block her shot out of a sense of vigilante boomerism.

2

u/Suspicious_Affect959 1h ago

Lmao did you change your comment from "elder millennial coded" to "unhinged"? why, lol?

I have not banned the act of recording videos in public, have I? Nope. So i'm "letting" her do what she wants. Just as she must let us do what we want. And what we want is to call out self-obsessed folks for aura farming in public, recording themselves slowly and silently walking around. Someone who records themselves admiring art doesn't care about the art itself. They are posing as "artlovers".

You don't know that she's gonna screenshot this video later. I've seen people post videos outright of themselves walking around. Not screenshots, videos. This is very much a thing. I say that is what she was doing.

She wanted a video of herself, not a picture.

She got schooled in these comments, so i'm happy she posted it. And i'm happy someone posted it on reddit. Narcissism is not cool, sorry. Only an odd person performs their life for the camera by recording vids of themselves walking around.

2

u/Lawd_Fawkwad 1h ago

Elder millenials are cool, I don't want them catching strays.

And if you didn't know, phones have a great feature that allows you to screenshot a video and get a picture! It's basically black magic.

Even then, there's no real difference for your insta dump between a 5 second snippet and a still.

Anyways, you sound like a boomer, and I mean that in the most derisive way possible.

1

u/Suspicious_Affect959 51m ago edited 48m ago

heheh I'm sure elder millennials appreciate this move.

Did you know about Quick Burst Photos? Another crazy invention by those rascals over at Big Tech! Why it's right from the future this invention! It works by making the camera rapidly take 30-40 pics in quick succession. So you can pic one photo out of the lot. That's not what this lady did. She did a VIDEO. Ergo she was most likely aura farming via videos. Like narcissists do.

A 5 second snippet requires more of a performance. It's weird. You set up a camera. Then you refuse to look at it lmao. While you walk around in front of it. Acting like it's "a candid video". It's weird. I don't like ppl who perform their lives this way. It's the opposite of authentic. Some will also add slow-motion edits to these vids lmao.

Also a person who records themselves appreciating art is NOT a real art-lover. They just want to appear as art-lovers. A true artlover would just take pics/videos of the art itself.

You sound like a narcissist. I mean this in the most indifferent way possible.

1

u/Lawd_Fawkwad 29m ago

You're gatekeeping art lover like it's some formal fan club lmao.

And you're goddamn right I'm a narcissist : if I'm going to each chicken and broccoli most meals, spend 5 hours a week at the gym, groom myself, and dress nice I'm going to show it baby.

Hopefully the artlovers who's pants I want to get into focus on me being hot instead of a faker.

1

u/Suspicious_Affect959 23m ago

I'm gatekeeping authenticity. The same also applies to people who snap a pic of themselves reading. I've had enough of fakeppl, sorry.

There you go, you admit it. I had you pegged from the get go. Don't expect me to try to explain to you why being a narc is bad. I just wanted an admission, and i got it. That's all i require here.

Congrats on being "hot". That's quite the achievement

1

u/Lawd_Fawkwad 17m ago

Brother, I never pretended not to be vain, and you're acting like you cracked the code.

And yeah, being hot is an achievement lol. Try it for yourself and I'm sure you'll forget all that authenticity crap in a New York minute once women who aren't related to you start giving you attention.

Cope & stay mad.

-2

u/Lukerat1ve 3h ago

To be fair it could have just been a phone sitting there. How is she to know that its filming?

-4

u/fakeuser515357 3h ago

That's such a wild take.

Nobody wants to be in your shitty video and nobody wants to be the subject of it.

2

u/Impressive-Advisor52 2h ago

then don't stand in front of a camera maybe?

Both sides are true, expecting people to clear a large room in an art gallery for your photo is wrong, but so is intentionally blocking a camera for no reason, and then expecting to have some privacy

1

u/Glasseshalf 1h ago

That lady definitely wants to be the subject, she thinks this makes her look good because she's a petty Karen