Slashdot Mirror
More Performers Are Demanding Audiences Lock Up Their Phones (nytimes.com)
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.
'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.
Like emergencies. Can the phones be retrieved quickly enough in the "fog of war". Can a police situation be recorded?
.. holding mobiles and tablets. That is why I do not go to concerts anymore.
how else will a customer pay for a t-shirt/beer/etc?
I'm guessing the man would be all for tying a body camera to every police officer on earth, but god help you if you point a camera at HIM. Do that and you'll have to put it in a DRM-enabled "satchel" and pay a few hundred bucks for a ticket to see his drugged out ass.
Maybe someone should mention to Chappelle that he hasn't been relevant since he literally clicked his heels three times and went back to Africa.
That's one Olympic-level strawman you've built there - probably gold-medal caliber!
Are you too dumb to see the difference between police officers - agents of the GOVERNMENT who we HAVE to deal with - being required to videotape their interactions with citizens and a PRIVATE performer that you only get to see on HIS TERMS and who NO ONE IS FORCING YOU TO SEE?
Or maybe you just trust that those government agents known as "police" will always do the right thing?
Use your eyes. And brain.
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.
I'm tired to go to nice performances, including circus, movies, etc (i.e., most stuff that is funny in a dark room), and then people insists in get their big phones and tablets and turn on the bright screen in your face and ruin your experience, blocking your vision and spotting light in your eyes.
If people really used to just attend urgency calls, devices like this will be not required. For sure, probably doctors will be allowed to keep their devices. In case of fire, there are employees in the place able to make a call. Like in the old days.
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.
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
Not wasting a cent on any performer who engages in this nonsense.
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.
1) go to a concert and get a Yondr pouch .....
2) put inside a Samsung Galaxy 7
3)
4) Profit!
I guess if you're selling out every show and can't find a bigger venue in town then you can get away with this.
As a D-list performer? Please, tag yourself at my show, throw a couple pics up on social media, drop a clip on youtube. Selfies at the merch table after our set.
Tomorrow night we're in Sheboygan, tell your friends there how awesome tonight was...
Why would he care at that point? He got his money. They're the immature brats who think they're entitled to his performance.
If your life revolves around your phone, you need to reevaluate your life.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Been better if the audience just said a collective "Fuck you" and walked out...
I'll now ask you to kindly elaborate as to exactly how your recommendation would have helped anyone.
You can try and make a point about being an "adult" and "choices" and all the usual BS excuses, but nothing you will bring forth can excuse the stupidity of paying a LOT of money to see a live performer in order to disrespect and ignore the piss out of them and their performance all evening with a cell phone in your face or theirs.
"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."
If you don't want to see the artist's performance enough to abide by their wishes and see it live rather than filtered through your smart phone, then stay home. Those of us attending the concert will be quite happy not to put up with the jostling, distracting light from your device's display, and the general assholery of a self-entitled little prick who believes he has some kind of divine right to be accommodated.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
I've never used my phone during a movie or concert, but I'll be damned if the performer I'm paying to see will force me to part with my property for their convenience.
The primary reason I carry a mobile device is for safety and security. I'm not giving that up because others can't control themselves.
I guess if the performer doesn't trust me with my mobile device, then they really don't want my money that badly.
Maybe you just don't understand the similarities in your haste to point out the differences.
The only similarity is that video recording take place. The context in which these two occur are so vastly different that the similarities are irrelevant.
Don't agree to it. Walk away. Convince your friends not to. A wedding? Really? How about just announcing that the bride and groom don't want people holding up their phones. Then it'll be obvious who really respects them.
This day and age? Hell, the Grateful Dead did it for DECADES ... and yet, they always seemed to sell tickets to the next show.
Why, you can even go and download high bitrate MP3s of shows, often recorded directly from the sound board. Here ya go - only 11000 recordings... https://archive.org/details/Gr...
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
Just another performer that I wouldn't go and see live then.
Sorry, but recording devices are not new.
Interruptions from the audience are not new.
Why we feel the need to act on them now that copyright law is VASTLY in favour of the artists, whereas before it wasn't, I can't fathom. But that also seems to be the trigger for this kind of reaction.
If you want me to effectively cripple my phone, something that stays with me all the time EVEN THOUGH I WORK IN SCHOOLS, then we're going to clash heads. I either won't come and see you perform, or I have to jump through a specific, special, nuisance every time I want to do so. Like a form of DRM on a live performance. That will affect my enjoyment, and the rate I'd be willing to pay for that performance.
There's a time and a place for smartphones. I happily agree with you throwing out ANYONE whose phone goes off at a classical concert, for instance. No problem at all. Their own fault for failing to manage their device when they were given the opportunity to voluntarily manage their device.
Even chicken-wire cages around the venue, or whatever. Fine. But to demand I start putting useful items in little bags, you're just trying to be like the TSA and other places who are overstepping their remit under the name of something else (terrorism, etc.). And do you demand the same of, say, a smartwatch?
I can get a mobile phone with camera and wireless and bluetooth that's the size and thickness of a credit card. Literally, now, on Amazon, for 30 GBP. You can't police that kind of thing. And you're at a large venue with people who've paid to see you and you object to them immortalising that special performance?
Wholesale copyright infringement is an entirely different problem. Taking people's phones away doesn't solve that either.
But the problem of "how can I convince an audience that they want to pay money to come and see me?" That's a difficult enough prospect as it is without adding obstacles for yourself.
If I ever did want to go to such a thing, and there was a warning on booking that this was required, I'd cancel. If I turned up and this was an ad-hoc policy, not notified and only implemented on the door? We're going to have an argument and I'm going to seek a refund for more than just my ticket and time wasted.
Or someone will upload the video to youtube or bittorent... where others will watch the show and guess what? Fewer ticket sales. If money was not an issue, most of these performers would not mind cameras. But they have to make a living... so no cameras, no piracy.
Nonsense argument. The Grateful Dead was a band that allowed recordings of their concerts and it didn't affect attendance one bit as far as anyone can tell. They cultivated a genuine relationship with their fans unlike too many of the overly entitled "artists" we see today. If a crappy cell phone recording of your concert makes people want to go less then you probably weren't selling anything worth attending in the first place. A good concert cannot remotely be replicated by a shaky video taken on an iPad. I think a lot of performers are trying to hide behind this stuff to cover their lack of actual ability and the poor value for money of their concerts.
The wishes of the performer are bullshit, they are showing themselves to the public and getting filmed. Boo hoo. I don't owe them a revenue stream above and beyond what I paid to see them. If Chappelle wants to have stormtroopers locking up cellphones, well, I wasn't going to go see that lame ass anyway.
On a different note, I took my wife three times over the past few years to see John Prine, the folk singer. Prine doesn't give two shits who films him. I watched him sing. She got out her cellphone and went up to the edge of the stage and filmed him playing Angel from Montgomery and a couple other tunes. She wanted to remember the night that she saw him before he croaks.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Performer in a private venue is not public.
I don't break the fucking law
I bet you do every single day.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
No, but a performer has no expectation of privacy, which is typically the rule of thumb used when determining if recording is permitted.
Sounds like you need counseling rather than a concert.
Sounds like you're a wimp who wouldn't last five minutes in a pit. That's OK, but don't pretend it makes you superior. It doesn't. It makes you fragile.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Yes, your local peace officers do the right thing. That's their job and there is a multitude of tools, trainings, and stats to back it up.
OTOH, them wearing body cams is a great way to show the world just how much of an stupid asshole YOU are. I think those should automatically be uploaded to youtube and found by a simple google search by your future employers, possible friends, love interests, family, etc etc. It'll also tie the hands of a peace officer in not being able to let you go with a warning - something that is the most common occurrence today but unfortunately disappearing.
Don't demand something without accepting reciprocation.
Venue owners can ban anyone not in a federally protected class of people.
So, smokers yes, races no.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Exactly why do you think a performer, in a private venue, has no expectation of privacy? That can be totally determined by the venue owner. Who may or may not have an agreement with the performer on what is or is not allowed.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Who will go broke first - the performers or the venues?
So when I arrive an hour early to make sure that I'm not late because of traffic or the crowds, I can't pass the time until the event starts by playing games on my phone.
And parents can't check up on their kids by sending texts.
No, thanks.
Most already charge too much money for an evening's entertainment. If the price of admission didn't keep you away, then the price of food/snacks/drinks might. Now, if the total cost doesn't keep you away, this silly rule might. In my case, it definitely will.
So, no point to be made. Good discussion.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
That was quite impressive, you spent the whole time bemoaning celebrities that you failed to point out why you would have the right to film someone against their wishes in a private establishment.
Police should wear a cam because they are individuals in a profession that is going to put them in a situation at some point where we need to know what happens. Not want to know. They are going to be put into a position where they might have to fire their gun or use other physical force. We need to know if that's justified or not. It's a way of watching the watchers. It's a way for the Police to get some vindication when they are falsely accused of doing something wrong. There's so much benefit to it as a public servant that it makes sense. We don't require them to wear it home.
Performers are being a bit ridiculous in not wanting to be recorded, but I do kind of understand it. They don't want to be distracted with flashes during a performance, they don't want their material leaked and stolen online, they don't wan't a joke taken seriously that was highly inappropriate. They know it's inappropriate but a good comedian might tell it anyway to emphasize a point, shock people. They don't want it taken out of context.
You only want to record them. Take a step back and think about it for a second. Do you have to allow me into your house with a video camera and record everything you do? Maybe, but you sure don't have to let me. You don't even have to let a police officer into your home with a camera, they would need a warrant. So why you as a public citizen who rented a space can't deny people from entering your rented venue can't deny it.
Now you go and learn how to properly debate instead of skirting an issue and changing the subject.
Don't like it? Vote with your wallet. Don't attend concerts / shows that require you to lock up your phone. You won't be missed by anybody.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
So when you're driving home and there is a DUI checkpoint ahead, how do you not deal with the police?
I had this exact situation a few weeks back - on my way home with my girlfriend in the car, police had a checkpoint set up. The office claimed he could smell alcohol on my breath (total fucking horseshit) and performed a field sobriety test on me. Unsurprisingly, I passed and continued home, a little salty over the affair.
How would you "not deal" with that? Turn around as soon as you see the checkpoint, all but inviting a good legal rogering from making an illegal U-turn and giving them all the probable cause in the world to fuck you over? Tell the officer to fuck off, inviting arrest, or some other bullshit 'humble' charge they want to stick on you for not being cooperative? Refuse to get out of the car, which opens you up to being cited for DUI and the mountain of bullshit that comes with it?
Just because you "don't break the fucking law" doesn't mean that the law won't still fuck with you.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
So, in other words, it would be just like the previous 225 years of the existence of the United States of America.
How did Abraham "Honest Abe" Lincoln ever get elected (twice) without smartphones to keep him honest!?
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Trump's PussyLeaks comments helped him with blacks. Apparently the only men in America who will still admit to liking pussy.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
... except the performer.
Seems rather shortsighted to be blocking all that free publicity.
Stealing a joke? Really? If they are so concerned, that's what copyright is for... otherwise, they are just another lame entitled person with no real skills relying on secrecy to dupe people into spending money to see their lame show.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
I get to a wedding, and the Bride/groom asks me to do this, I'll turn around, head home, and take my gift with me
Enjoy your wedding
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso