Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

More Performers Are Demanding Audiences Lock Up Their Phones (nytimes.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the recording-the-recording-artists dept.

More performers -- and other venues -- are discovering a new anti-piracy technology called Yondr -- including comedian Dave Chappelle. Slashdot reader HughPickens.com quotes the New York Times: Fans are required to place their cellphones into Yondr's form-fitting lockable pouch when entering the show, and a disk mechanism unlocks it on the way out. Fans keep the pouch with them, but it is impossible to snap pictures, shoot videos or send text messages during the performance while the pouch is locked.

'I know my show is protected, and it empowers me to be more honest and open with the audience,' says Dave Chappelle...But some fans object to not being able to disseminate and see live shows via videotape...
"In this day and age, my phone is how I keep my memory," one live-music fan told the Washington Post, adding "If you don't want your music heard, then don't perform it." But the device is becoming more common, and according to the Times it's now also being used at weddings, restaurants, schools, and when movies are being prescreened.

11 of 552 comments (clear)

  1. what about security? by OffTheLip · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Like emergencies. Can the phones be retrieved quickly enough in the "fog of war". Can a police situation be recorded?

    1. Re:what about security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That depends entirely upon how much you're being paid to be on call 24/7. To use an old expression, "every man has his price," and if you're being paid enough to feasibly retire in a short timespan on the earnings, it sort of changes the economics of the matter. -PCP

    2. Re:what about security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I guess I would never be at one of these events in the first place. I hate concerts and never go anymore. But, if I were to go - two phones. 1 in my sock maybe. No problem. I wouldn't want to record their lame concert / comedy - but would want to be able to access the device in the situations you mention.

    3. Re:what about security? by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That depends entirely upon how much you're being paid to be on call 24/7. To use an old expression, "every man has his price," and if you're being paid enough to feasibly retire in a short timespan on the earnings, it sort of changes the economics of the matter. -PCP

      Bingo. I wouldn't do a 24/7 on-call job again, but I did that once in IT. Those were 5 grueling years, but they paid well and served me well. They also got me (temporarily) out of being a developer and to see all the other important shit that goes around development.

      I became a much better developer because of it. Now with children, I wouldn't do it... unless I have a need for a job or if the pay is so spectacular that I could sacrifice 3-4 years plowing at it to create a greater safety net with which to provide (and protect) my family.

      The previous OP, just because a choice was made that doesn't fit the shallow pigeonholes of your world view, that does not rob them of legitimacy. Shut your mouth and learn to walk other people's shoes for a change.

    4. Re:what about security? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you are on call 24/7, you really need to re-evaluate your life choices...

      Why? I made a very nice living by being on call. Nice enough to retire at 55. Now I'm not on call at all.

      A lot of the people who thought I was crazy are now re-evaluating their own life choices, because after finally doing the realmath, they "plan" on never retiring - assuming health issues or a forced retirement analogue doesn't get them.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  2. Re:Interesting, Dave Chappelle. by jonnyj · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One great benefit of the smartphone era is that we can easily find out when two-faced, dissembling politicians attempt to say things in private lectures that conflict with their publicly stated policy positions.

    So let's imagine a typical fundraising dinner in Dave Chappelle's dystopian future. A keynote speech will be given by a prominent politician, and a comedian will lighten the mood with a short gig between dessert and the auction. The comedian insists that his intellectual property is protected by Yondr, so the politician is free to promise unpublicised tax-breaks for his loyal supporters, to make racially insensitive remarks or to heap insults on some random basket of deplorables with no threat of being exposed during his next election campaign.

    I can imagine a world where no self-respecting politician will give a speech without the comfort of an accompanying comedian who conveniently insists on 'protection'. This is not good for democracy.

  3. Case in point where this would have been great... by thejynxed · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Went to a Rob Zombie show rather recently. He was not happy with the sea of phones and asked several times for people to put them away before finally just saying, "You know guys, you all ask why it seems rock seems like it is dead. It's because of stuff like this. I'm a rocker, not a tv guy. I don't know what to do when all I see staring me in the face is a bunch of cameras. I can't do anything with that." Thankfully people finally got the damned hint and he went on with the show instead of leaving (and yes, it was fscking great - he even went through an entire White Zombie album on top of his solo stuff).

    --
    @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
  4. Stand-up is a special case by Kiuas · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was recently at the Louis C. K. show here in Helsinki and they did not require anyone to lock away their phones, but prior to the show there was an announcement that anyone caught filming the show will be ejected.

    As a lover of stand-up, I can understand why they're strict about this: the tickets to the show cost nearly 60 euros and essentially people are paying that to hear new material. It's different from music and other performing arts where most often people know what they're going to see. AC/DC won't lose any ticket sales if a few dozen guys upload a shitty quality video of Thunderstruck from midfield. But a recording - even audio only - of the new material by a stand up performer will probably hurt ticket sales.

    That being said this seems like overreach: I did not see anyone being ejected from the aforementioned show (well, outside 1 dude who was way too drunk but he wasn't recording). People who've invested money to get to the show are unlikely to risk missing the show just to get a clip online, so I don't see a need for such a high-tech solution.

    --
    "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
  5. Value for money by sjbe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That is why I do not go to concerts anymore.

    That's why? I don't go because the value for money almost always sucks. Once in a while a concert is an awesome experience but most of the time it's just an expensive, overly loud, poorly produced, sloppily performed, rehashing of music I've heard before and better in a recorded format. Sometimes you get the bonus of drunk or stoned concert goers and of course the numerous inconsiderate a-holes or thugs that too often seem to attend. Sure, live music CAN be awesome but it usually isn't. I really don't get the point of concert where i need ear plugs to avoid getting hearing damage.

    Maybe all that is your bag and you dig it in spite of the problems. Cool by me. Have fun. Personally I find many/most concerts something to be avoided because the experience is decidedly unpleasant. I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions and I've been to a handful of excellent concerts myself. But most simply aren't worth even a fraction of the price of admission.

  6. Re:Hope you enjoy being broke by bickerdyke · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I beg to differ.

    I completely agree with you that it is a live experience that should be experienced live.

    But it's a difference between a 20 seconds clip to try to make your friends green with envy (if that's possible with the crappy quality) or to serve as a souvenir (only needs to be barely recognizable for that) or trying to make the worst replacement of a professional DVD production.

    Best solution I've seen was a singer-songwriter. At the beginning he asked the audience to put phones away until the encore, during which the stage (and house) lighting would be set in a way that would allow for at least somewhat acceptable picture quality. Result: Audience (and artist) got an undisturbed show AND souvenir material.

    --
    bickerdyke
  7. Re:Forest of hands by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Back in my day, we had half-naked women pop-up. Why can't we go back to those simpler times...?