Press/Photos/Video restrictions

[arahel_jazz]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

As someone who ended up in the background of a Wired pic of a contest last year - without permission and uncredited, I generally agree with the concept of trying to keep the mainstream press on a tight leash. Good luck with that.

Unfortunately, they are in the business of trying to get the most out of provoking the situation and "getting the shot". Hence the hallway interveiws (looks more cool than a staged room, and more spontaneous). Hence the ambush while you are sitting at a contest table with all your gear spread out and BT4 running on your screen.

Since I'm not the most photogenic of the crowd, I don't worry too much about folks taking my picture. Unless they bring a camera to the pool during the Goon Band set, I don't think there will be much that I am going to be doing at DC19 that I wouldn't want to see published.

FWIW - if TV wants to exploit me, they better be ready to pony up some $$.

[Nikita]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

These are the rules below. Signs are created. This went over without incident last year. I am sorry for the less than 0.5% out of 10k who may not like it, however no other place would you be able to enforce photography rules in public like we do regardless. If you are in a public place you are not private. DEF CON Is open to the public with admission, you agree on our rules of conduct with admission however public photography is extremely difficult to enforce. You can't expect us to continue to keep the press out while the attendees are doing whatever they want and we can't enforce it 24/7. If everyone plays nice by following the below rules it's a happy medium and frankly we get some better coverage and better press out of it. All the other cons don't have to make press hide in a dark room to interview people and do their reports. Kinda makes that whole "evil hackers don't want to be seen we can't show people or they will make our macbooks explode" attitude. CES, SXSW, E3, PAX, etc they all get a lot of coverage and get shown more to the general public instead of just written articles. Why can't we get our names out there a little more, show cool photos, and what it's all about? Anyways, If you don't want to be on film don't walk in front of the camera, they are not small I feel for you if you honestly can't see a reporter standing there in front of a camera giving an interview. This is my opinion but nowhere else would you expect the rest of the world not to film you and do as you say. Once you step out your front door, you have no right to demand not to be filmed in public. There are laws against violating a reasonable expectation of privacy, but press and public photo laws have some pretty nice rights allowing them to do so.

>>>>>>>>>>>
Public photography is now *allowed.
RULES:

1. Groups, "crowd shots", and individuals participating in public
events, contests, or activities are *allowed to be photographed.
(excluding CTF)
2.Respect the rights of the individual not to be photographed. Do not
harass, stalk, or annoy others, deletion of photos can be requested by
staff.
3.Photograph private parties & areas outside of the badged conference
area AT YOUR OWN RISK.

You consent to these rules with admission to the conference, failure
to comply can result in revocation of admissions without refund. *We
reserve the right to revoke this policy, at any time, on a case by
case basis.
>>>>>>>

If Jeff wants to change the photo policy, he will let us know, I'm sure he is listening and taking in the feedback you guys are leaving to this discussion. If he can find a way to tweak it to a happy medium then ok we will make new signs. As of now, I only report what I know and I know those are the photo rules.

[TheCotMan]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

It is possible that it was impossible to legally enforce, or would be too costly, or the trouble with enforcing it was worse than not enforcing the policies on pictures. It would be great to hear why, and if the reason is trivial, to see if it can be reversed.

(Altering your reply to bullet-list for reasons 'why')
* No other place would you be able to enforce photography rules in public like we do regardless.
* If you are in a public place you are not private.
* DEF CON Is open to the public with admission, you agree on our rules of conduct with admission
* However public photography is extremely difficult to enforce.
* You can't expect us to continue to keep the press out while the attendees are doing whatever they want and we can't enforce it 24/7.
* we get some better coverage and better press out of it.
* All the other cons don't have to make press hide in a dark room to interview people and do their reports.
* Kinda makes that whole "evil hackers don't want to be seen we can't show people or they will make our macbooks explode" attitude.
* CES, SXSW, E3, PAX, etc they all get a lot of coverage and get shown more to the general public instead of just written articles.

Summary:
* No expectation to privacy anyway
* Too hard to enforce (cell phone cameras, wearable cameras too tiny to spot, goons can't be everywhere: ratio of goons-to-attendees gets smaller every year)
* Image (perception in media, evil hackers, show what we do, openness, accessible, advertising, etc.)
* Other cons do not enforce policies for "no pictures"

Thanks for the answer on reasons why!

Another question, though on the next section:

1. Groups, "crowd shots", and individuals participating in public
events, contests, or activities are *allowed to be photographed.
(excluding CTF)

Why is (?was?) the CTF room an exception? Will it be an exception this year?

The reason I ask, is for all of the reasons listed as arguments in favor of allowing photography everywhere at Defcon, if the reasons are meaningful and justify the decision everywhere else where attendee privacy is concerned, why don't these same reasons hold as much merit in the CTF room? And then the question becomes, "why are the counter-arguments for 'no photography' in the CTF room more meaningful for CTF Defcon people than for all other Defcon people?" This becomes an item of contention, with favorable treatment to some, but not others. (I don't expect you to answer this one. For all I know, we inherited this constraint/requirement, or it was imposed from another agreement, or grandfather-clause.)

You know me well enough to know I am not blaming you for this, or even assuming that you set these policies; don't kill the messenger. You are the first person to reply with a good list of reasons why a decision was made, so I say Thanks for that! Volunteering such information on, "why things are the way they are," should be supported.

If Jeff wants to change the photo policy, he will let us know, I'm sure he is listening and taking in the feedback you guys are leaving to this discussion. If he can find a way to tweak it to a happy medium then ok we will make new signs. As of now, I only report what I know and I know those are the photo rules.

This is something I really like at Defcon. Defcon is still a distributed system of systems, but not a director micro-managing each system, just granting permission and offering resources to subsystems. These contests/events further delegate responsibilities to well known and trust people, on and on, until events, contests and parties appear. Then most of the people involved with offering contests, events, parties, and more at Defcon use attendee and participant feedback in making decisions on how to change things for the following year. I like this hands-on approach where organizers get their hands dirty with not only running their contests, events or parties, but also in how they seek to improve them, asking for or seeking-out feedback.

[Deviant Ollam]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

just because it's "hard" to enforce a rule, that doesn't make the rule bad.

it seems like basically everyone commenting in this thread wishes for the original DEFCON photo rules, and it seems like everyone who speaks officially for DEFCON is opposed to (or at least not super receptive to) the group's feelings.

the primary two arguments i'm gathering tend to be:

1. hard to enforce - with new tech (small cameras, phones) it's hard for goons or staff to enforce the no public photos rule
2. we'll get more press - this is a little less clear for me, but it seems the perception is that somehow the mainstream media doesn't like our policies or somehow would be more agreeable to documenting DEFCON if there were less restrictions

my main feelings sort of are:

1. hard to enforce - i have a lot of faith in the goons and their judgement. sure, we won't catch everyone... we won't even catch a 10% of the folk who break the rule. but having the rules that the community supports IN PLACE a least gives us all the high ground (goons and general attendees) if we choose to speak out when someone is being a douche.
2. we'll get more press - i have to admit, i don't really care about this. i'm not a press guy or good at P.R. or anything, but i mean come on... is DEFCON unhealthy or something? attendance tapering off? budget crisis to be averted by getting more attention? are the attendees going home saying "awe, damn, i wish my family/boss/lover would see a special on Dateline showing how cool DEFCON was"?

i don't want to seem like i'm indifferent to the way other people feel... but i still don't see how the community isn't better-served by the old rules. no one's going to blame the goons if the enforcement isn't a top priority... but at least knowing that the rule is in place would make a lot of the veteran attendees happier.

[Dark Tangent]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

I agree that it is a hard balance. There was a lot of internal discussion last year before we decided to try out the new rules. Would you say there was less or more accidental background shots compared to years past?

Like I said, I am not opposed to trying the older rules again, but there needs to be easy to understand rules and expectations.


How do you distinguish between press and a blogger who does not register as such?
How do you track who is a repeat offender?
You just can't pull the film out of a camera, and you can always undelete a shot.

[HighWiz]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

This would be a wonderful question to post the DefCon Facebook Account. I think you will get a lot more responses of the overall attendees there, than you would get here.

All the other cons don't have to make press hide in a dark room to interview people and do their reports. Kinda makes that whole "evil hackers don't want to be seen we can't show people or they will make our macbooks explode" attitude. CES, SXSW, E3, PAX, etc they all get a lot of coverage and get shown more to the general public instead of just written articles.

That's not actually accurate. If you go to those event, and you try to take pictures of certain booths, some staff will say "I'm sorry we can't allow you to take photos, but we have press photos you can use". Usually at many of those events, it is up to the specific vendor/booth. E3 is prime example of that. In their case it's managing the message of the press, whereas for DefCon it has been respecting privacy of the attendee.

I think one of the issues that everyone seems to be going round and round about, is what kind of space DefCon actually is...

I don't believe DefCon is "Public Space" (could be wrong though).

If you go to a concert or a a movie theater anyone may buy a ticket, but they may restrict taking photos/video. At most, what you may be talking about is.. A 'Semi-public' space.

If everyone plays nice by following the below rules it's a happy medium

This being DefCon... People are always going to buck, bend and break the rules. It's a fact. It's one of the things that is encourage in many of the contests.

I am sorry for the less than 0.5% out of 10k who may not like it.

I'm not trying to be mean here at all, but is that really the case? If you look just at this poll as a possible sampling, you are in the 0.5% space. Not the other way around. It's why my original statement was, that if you want a better sampling, use a bigger pool.

I agree that it is a hard balance. There was a lot of internal discussion last year before we decided to try out the new rules. Would you say there was less or more accidental background shots compared to years past?

Like I said, I am not opposed to trying the older rules again, but there needs to be easy to understand rules and expectations.

How do you distinguish between press and a blogger who does not register as such?
How do you track who is a repeat offender?
You just can't pull the film out of a camera, and you can always undelete a shot.

I don't know if there are any easy answers to those questions. And honestly, from a logistical perspective, it does make more sense to have a more "laxed" photo policy. But even with the old DefCon policy, I think there were "written rules" and then "unwritten rules".

In this case I'd say the Rules would generally be "guidelines" for what is and is not acceptable in regards to photos.


As Cotman talked about above. As for the CTF... I think if you decide to apply rules to DefCon, that should apply to ALL of DefCon. When you start making exceptions to the rules is where you start running into the issues. And how bout DefCon Kids? Can someone just walk around taking photos of all the kids? [Maybe the "think of the children" argument will work]

I didn't "participate" in the poll, 'cuz personally I really don't give a shit whether people take my photo or not. However, after seeing all the other people who did participate in the poll, it does make me think the it is a semi-big issue for many. And it seems the justification for the policy change is kinda circumspect.

I hope this post doesn't come off as too harsh.

[Nikita]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

Summary:

Why is (?was?) the CTF room an exception? Will it be an exception this year?

The reason I ask, is for all of the reasons listed as arguments in favor of allowing photography everywhere at Defcon, if the reasons are meaningful and justify the decision everywhere else where attendee privacy is concerned, why don't these same reasons hold as much merit in the CTF room? And then the question becomes, "why are the counter-arguments for 'no photography' in the CTF room more meaningful for CTF Defcon people than for all other Defcon people?" This becomes an item of contention, with favorable treatment to some, but not others. (I don't expect you to answer this one. For all I know, we inherited this constraint/requirement, or it was imposed from another agreement, or grandfather-clause.)

You know me well enough to know I am not blaming you for this, or even assuming that you set these policies; don't kill the messenger. You are the first person to reply with a good list of reasons why a decision was made, so I say Thanks for that! Volunteering such information on, "why things are the way they are," should be supported.


.

in short its policy is grandfathered in. Press was NEVER allowed to photograph in the CTF room and neither is anyone else. They people in CTF room are doing things...well...a little bit more devious in the eyes of narrowminded people. A photo of a guy hacking away in the game could make his boss mad. Also, it's distracting and the photos could ( well used to be you sent in spies) be used to give another team an advantage, or ruin something, some sort of planning, etc. Not to say that is entirely the reason, but CTF has always been given more seclusion from prying eyes, loiters, photographers, etc.

Also, they are an invite only game. Its participants are in a private game and the teams want privacy, it's a little bit expected as part of the game.

The same is for DEF CON Kids, As it's being run more like a private event, it is an event for minors and minors are not allowed to be photographed without parents permission, except in public ( by law) however the rules are laid out that state not to be a menace, not to take someone's photo when they ask you not to, and that we reserve the right to discretion and to revoke it at any point. If you're being a jerk about it, then GTFO. Basically, I would consider that to be a private event and the organizers have the right to let in who they want ( minors ) and refuse entry to those they dont. It would be considered outside the badged areas and honestly the goons around, or any goon around for that matter would possess the skills to determine if you were being a jerk or perv and tell you stop and enforce the rules.

Hey thanks for the support, that is the rules we all came together and decided on but I'm not the one who made them and approved them to start using.

The main argument was why is it ok for attendees to go around filming and taking pictures ( and personally I have told many attendee to stop and been told to f-myself) and we tell the press who if we were a little more open with we might get some good press and put a good image on hackers to go piss off. We got a lot of complaints actually, and also..it was hard for DEF CON to get any good photos too.

I'll be honest here, we ( DEF CON ) would like to get more photos of cool things happening and people doing stuff. We figured, ( a collective we) That if you were participating in a public contest or game that put you on display, then your expectation of not being in the spotlight and having privacy is gone. So therefore if I jump up and play a game or enter gringo warrior, i don't have the right to expect people not to photograph me, despite the fact that i would HATE to have my photo taken.

I don't want my picture taken. I'm extremely self conscious, shy and I do not like how I look in photos. Since the baby this is even more so, in fact I almost didn't want to come to the show this year because I'd feel shameful if someone took my picture with the extra baby weight. So, if anyone would like photography BANNED at defcon, it would be me. But I feel that is completely unfair and isolates us. There are a lot of cool things happening that we should document and have cool pictures off. Things that don't involve drinking and strippers. Rather robots, locks,arduinos, neon lights and the occasional codpeice.


Also, I meant the 5% of you on the forums out of the 10k of attendees. I know most of you want to ban public photos based on the voting. Jeff is a fair person, I'm sure he will do what he can to find a balance.

I liked the idea someone mentioned about press having a buffer between public expressway and people who don't want to be in a crowd shot. Perhaps we tell them that if they want to do a public report we put up cones that basically would have it be like a caution reporter filming barrier. It's just an idea, but it could definitely prevent people from walking in front of the camera by accident. The problem with the interview room is they want cool things going on behind them. Stories with a beige wall and no interesting people and cool blinkie lights, well, those stories don't make the evening news sorry to say. The reporter don't bother and all we really get are written articles. It's not like we NEED more people or NEED more advertisement, but it doesn't hurt. It wouldn't hurt to have a fun positive image, it wouldnt hurt to show that we have a lot more going on than hacking computers and cell phones, I'd like to get some more people from other groups into our little defcon clique, but that's just me. I'd love some more makers and gamers.

What other compromises could we come up with? How can we work it so that those who want photos in public can and those who want privacy can, without removing either rights, but enforcing a written rule we can go to. If we had a creative way to balance the two, or a compromise from you guys it could work out theoretically. So....ideas? Instead of banning it, how do we do it responsibly?

Really really really tired, so i'm sorry for the mess and typos.

[Bbox]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

I see 2 issues, first the crowd shots. How about a compromise, why not have the (Example) main hallways and rooms no crowd shots but designate the corridor marked Lambada, Conga and Tango that is outside the press room anyway open for crowd shots and activity interviews. In this example at most people entering track 3 & 4 will be affected and it is a short enough area if people are concerned to keep their heads down.

Now the 2nd issue are the private shots. I have seen a few really bad situations that could have been easily avoided if the picture taker would have just asked the person first. All ill feelings would have been avoided. Now I know people are going to laugh and make silly comments about my next statement but...

Why not have some small designator to wear in a specific spot that gives people an understanding on where you stand on being photographed. For the Defcon Forum Meet this year I have silly stick-on tags that say things like "Talk to me", "Go Away", and varies combinations. The stickers of People willing to talk with anyone are green in color, the ones wanting not to talk with anyone they do not know are red and I have every combination in between. Now with the forum meet sticker I made them a bit larger and have some funky sayings for a fun silly icebreaker type effect but for being photographed or not you could have 3 very small markers, Green ok to photograph, Red do not ever photograph and Yellow please ask first.

Even if everyone used a yellow tag at the very least it would make others aware of the importance of asking a user first. It would also let reporters identify people to keep away from (RED) and people to approach (Green).

Now I know people are thinking how much everyone hates to be classified but come on, most people I come in contact classify themselves by wearing a specific Marker (think religious symbols, Tattoos, a specific style of dress, Organizational badges like Masonic rings or Military branch affiliations)

So if all it would take is a small color tag somewhere on the badge (Lost [Boy] can probably make this into part of the Badge fun) it could show the thousands of attendees that Defcon is concerned about privacy but allows its community to choose how to be photographed.

It may be silly, but everyone has a chance to get what they want and it would not be all that invasive.

P.S. Could someone explain to me is it DEFCON or DEF CON? I see a lot of my swag from the con is DEFCON but Nikita and DT often refer in writing to it as DEF CON. Thanks

[TheCotMan]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

P.S. Could someone explain to me is it DEFCON or DEF CON? I see a lot of my swag from the con is DEFCON but Nikita and DT often refer in writing to it as DEF CON. Thanks

https://www.defcon.org/html/links/dc-faq/dc-faq.html

Where did the name come from?

The short answer is a combination of places. There as a SummerCon in the summer, a HoHoCon in the winter, a PumpCon during Halloween, etc. I didn't want any association with a time of year. If you are a Phreak, or just use your phone a lot you'll notes "DEF" is #3 on the phone. If you are into military lingo DEF CON is short for "Defense Condition." Now being a fan of the movie War Games I took note that the main character, David Lightman, lived in Seattle, as I do, and chose to nuke Las Vegas with W.O.P.R. when given the chance. Well I knew I was doing a con in Vegas, so it all just sort of worked out.

When I asked about use in private, I was told the preference was "DEF CON" then DEFCON" then "Defcon" but of all the things to worry about, it wasn't something to enforce on the forums.

[HighWiz]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

in short its policy is grandfathered in. Press was NEVER allowed to photograph in the CTF room and neither is anyone else. They people in CTF room are doing things...well...a little bit more devious in the eyes of narrowminded people. A photo of a guy hacking away in the game could make his boss mad. Also, it's distracting and the photos could ( well used to be you sent in spies) be used to give another team an advantage, or ruin something, some sort of planning, etc. Not to say that is entirely the reason, but CTF has always been given more seclusion from prying eyes, loiters, photographers, etc.

Also, they are an invite only game. Its participants are in a private game and the teams want privacy, it's a little bit expected as part of the game.

<snip>

What other compromises could we come up with? How can we work it so that those who want photos in public can and those who want privacy can, without removing either rights, but enforcing a written rule we can go to. If we had a creative way to balance the two, or a compromise from you guys it could work out theoretically. So....ideas? Instead of banning it, how do we do it responsibly?

Looking over my posts, one of the things I believe I wasn't clear on is this:

As far as the photos goes, I believe that whatever policy you apply to the "media/press" should be applied to the attendees as well and vice versa. If you're going to let someone take pictures of contests XYZ as a normal attendee, then the press should have the same right. In essence, there should be one single photo policy. Not one policy for attendees and one policy for press.

Further, I will say that Nikita does have a very valid point in as far as the contests/events/speaking goes. If you're participating in anything on that level, then you should be aware that your photo will be taking. End of story. I mean, shit... What happens if you win? You may go up on stage at the closing ceremonies (where everyone will take your picture). The only thing I will disagree with, is that the same should go for CTF (but, we'll probably have to agree to disagree on that point).

Perhaps the happy medium is/will be location based. e.g. (Contests Room: fair game. Chill out space: not fair game, or something akin to that.) It's not the ideal solution for either party (Free for all/No Photos), but it's a possible middle ground. Give the press certain space in the contest area where they can do their stories/give their interviews and clearly designate that place (then people are aware that if they walk HERE, they are in direct shot of the camera and may be in the background). Will everybody like it? No. But it may be the best compromise.

As for still photography, if you're going to let ZeroCool take a photo AcidBurn in the chillout space or a corridor, then you need to let wired magazine do that same.

Green ok to photograph, Red do not ever photograph and Yellow please ask first.

Even if everyone used a yellow tag at the very least it would make others aware of the importance of asking a user first. It would also let reporters identify people to keep away from (RED) and people to approach (Green).

Now I know people are thinking how much everyone hates to be classified but come on, most people I come in contact classify themselves by wearing a specific Marker (think religious symbols, Tattoos, a specific style of dress, Organizational badges like Masonic rings or Military branch affiliations)

So if all it would take is a small color tag somewhere on the badge (Lost [Boy] can probably make this into part of the Badge fun) it could show the thousands of attendees that Defcon is concerned about privacy but allows its community to choose how to be photographed.

It may be silly, but everyone has a chance to get what they want and it would not be all that invasive.

Eh, while an interesting idea. I don't really see that working out. But hey, maybe Nikita/DT/Senior Staff will love it.

https://www.defcon.org/html/links/dc-faq/dc-faq.html


When I asked about use in private, I was told the preference was "DEF CON" then DEFCON" then "Defcon" but of all the things to worry about, it wasn't something to enforce on the forums.

DEF CON is the trademark. DefCon (for example) is my preferred usage.

[Tacitus]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

So, I have to ask, why does Defcon want more publicity? Is it to get more attendees? Defcon seems to easily fill whatever hotel it is in, so does there need to be more? Nikita claims 10k+ (attendees) is the goal to have 15k? 20k? To what end? If it is spreading and increasing knowledge, I am all for that. If it is socializing with people you only talk to online the other 51 weeks a year, I am all for that

But at what point is Defcon too big? I know a lot of "old-timers" tend to bemoan shift in community since the move from the A.P. - Defcon is not so much a "wander around and hang out by pool 2 as you go between parties at night and socialize" and more of a "go to talks during the day, try to get invited to a private party at night" kind of thing.

I remember when Defcon called itself "underground"

Taking a look at the page <title> tags on Defcon's main page shows an evolution

DC19- The Hacker Community's Foremost Social Network.
DC18- Hacking Conference
DC17 - 17 Hacking Conference
DC16- Real Time Social Networking for Ninjas
DC15- the Largest Underground Hacking Convention in the World


The meta description is still: "Started in 1992 by the Dark Tangent, DEFCON is the world's longest running and largest underground hacking conference."


So I ask this... with these press rules- wanting the press to come and take pictures of us and write about us, with experimenting with things like Defcon Kids and separate pay events like the workshops, is Defcon still "underground"? Was it ever? Do the Defcon organizers want it to be? What does Defcon gain by being "underground" or not? How does not being "underground" affect the community?

[Chris]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

I have avoided this thread for the most part because my opinion hasn't changed one bit since last year when this came up and I spewed forth my opinion quite a bit.

That said, I do want to restate my opinion on one piece (which appears to have been echoed by at least a couple of other people).

I have no issue with the press and/or attendees being allowed to take pictures if that's the policy we are going with. I have a HUGE issue with CTF being exempt. I don't understand why every point that has been made about why CTF somehow gets special treatment doesn't apply to <insert other contest participants here> or <insert joe hacker here>. If we have made the conscious decision that we want the press to do stories with pictures and spread the gospel of DEF CON then why would CTF be exempt from that? Didn't make sense last year. Doesn't make sense this year. I find it quite frustrating to basically tell someone that has, for example, contributed their time, money, and effort to DEF CON for years that their opinion is invalid because they aren't the chosen ones that participate in CTF and can therefore have their identities and image protected while you should suck it up and realize we live in a world where everything is photographed.

I'll disagree with our press policy until this inequity is addressed.

[arahel_jazz]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

The first rule of being incognito is to hide in plain sight. Throwing a red sticker on to keep people from taking your picture just screams "I am trying to hide - take my picture please".

I don't recommend it. If you don't want to be photographed, you should be personally responsible for keeping yourself out of harms way. That includes people like me that are horribly self-conscious about their appearance. Why do you think I wear that riddiculous hat?

My $.02 would be as follows:
- Unrestricted (but be polite) in all public areas, (hallways, Chill out, contest area, vendor area, Vegas 2.0,)
- Unrestricted (but be polite) in all talks. No flash photography so it doesn't screw up the presenters and video.
- Restricted in CTF. Makes sense and keeps a bit of the "mystery/hot secret" vibe going.
- Highly Restricted in DefConKids area - I agree with the idea of not taking pictures of minors. However - we may want to orchestrate a controlled photo op because DCK is such a ground-breaking (and controversial in the mainstream) event.

The camel's nose is already in the tent and he's eating your ice cream folks. The Rio is a much larger facility for the Goons to cover. They are not going to be able to babysit camera crews. It is also a much more attractive place for the media to be (more mainstream than AP or Rio). The "good old days" of being totally anonymous are gone.

By the way - smile when you walk around the Rio - your image is being taken by the Rio security camera system anyway. It would be fun to find out if they are using facial recognition, but I doubt the Rio would disclose that to us.

It should be made clear during opening remarks that your picture may be taken at just about any time by anyone (including hotel security). The best defense would be to be aware and if someone points a camera directly at you, ask them nicely to not take/publish your image.

[kallahar]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

When I was running the robot contest yeah, everyone wanted photos and everyone expected their photos to be taken. So I'd be totally fine with the rule "Photos/Video/Audio allowed in contest area only - NOWHERE ELSE"

For attendees taking the occasional photo, if goons see them they can tell them to stop. If they're a dick, they get bounced. Same goes for press - they get a warning, if they ignore it then they get bounced out of con. The Goons can easily handle this responsibility because the "press" usually stand out like a sore thumb (they also demand to skip the lines that regular attendees have to stand in).

If an attendee takes a few photos for his facebook page, not a big deal. If the "press" takes photo/video/audio then they're often looking for an "angle", some press is good, some is bad. We have no idea if the press is trying to "out" someone or if they're just doing a fluff piece.

Also agree with Tacitus - a "bigger" defcon doesn't benefit me, I'd rather have us return to being "underground" rather than attracting anyone who thinks computers are cool.

Kallahar

[Deviant Ollam]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

Just as kind of an academic self-study, i decided to go through all of my galleries from past DEFCON events where i took photos, in order to see how well i adhered to the standards i would hope to see imposed on others.

At first, i started to worry that i was being a hypocrite... as there are a few times that i took crowd shots. Then i started seeing that it was when i was very new to the scene and that i learned the community standards rather quickly. Still, i think that my galleries can serve up some rather useful example images, "what if" questions, and devil's advocate arguments...

DC9
i clearly took three photos of crowds at this first DEFCON where i had my camera...

1. i liked this shirt and snapped a pic. there are folk in the background, however. they're kind of distant and not clear... still, i wouldn't do that nowadays.

2. i think i accidentally took this shot while drunk. but i left it in the gallery. perhaps i should have just dropped it.

3. here's a typical example of a pool shot. the rest of the scene was empty, but easily others could have been behind on chairs or in the water. what then?

DC10
a notion to consider...

4. when simple nomad and renderman or simple nomad and i were in these photos, it was in the chillout area. the folk behind us aren't clear really... but should we have put our backs to a wall? nowadays, i would likely do that.

DC11
a few pretty good examples here...

5. contests being set up (by a very young KaiGoth and Doc!) with people standing around.

6. what about the vendor room? we haven't talked about that here.

7. an old forum meet photo, when Gasden had long hair! i don't know if i got permission or not, seemed like a spontaneous shot.

8. highly controversial... shot of that year's hot tub orgy. i did not actually take this photo, but later copied the file from another DEFCON gallery when i was attempting to show some people the "unbridled" atmosphere from the earlier cons at the Alexis Park.

DC12
pool push example...

9. ashley schwartau after a pool push... didn't ask, just kind of snapped it. what about her right to privacy? what about the others around her? are outdoor areas to be considered "general chillout" areas?

DC13
by now i knew plenty of people and had a much better notion of how to photo or not photo at DEFCON. almost all of my shots came from the Beer Cooling event, etc.

10. DC702 team, other folk in background

11. noid pouring Liquid N2 into a pool, other folk in background

12. security showing up, heh.

DC14
basically all of my photos that year were at beer cooling, a designated event...

13. renderman, with other folk in the background

14. roamer in a photo, not a contestant... just standing nearby

15. other folk in the background at Beer Cooling, pretty sure they weren't expecting to be photo'd

DC15
almost all just photos from the BBQ etc..

16. example of folk in the background of a shot

DC16
a number of hard calls...

17. a shot when folk were eating. did i ask everyone at the table? not easy to get up and walk away if you aren't into photos.

18. BBQ appearing again... surely i didn't ask all the folk you see scattered around behind Joia... not sure if i even asked her permission, either.

19. awesome crowd shot... example of what i hope would always be ok at DEFCON, at least at an event like the BBQ. anyone who didn't want their face in this long distance shot just held the bird up over their eyes.

20. example of a photo where the background is dark... what about any people who are there? can't really see them, but they might object when they saw the flash.

21. another dark background example... who thinks this is ok to photograph like that?

22. some party, but people in background, though. who thinks this is ok?

DC17
let's see what we have here...

23. photo taken at a private party, but no one else is in the image. who thinks that is ok? who thinks it's bad form to take the camera out at all there?

24. another party shot, this time with some slight faces behind

25. this is how i try to do crowd shots, even at contests and events

DC18
rounding it out with some from last year...

26. DC Shoot - a shooter from behind. is this anonymous? i mean, if you know her, you clearly know who this is.

27. a few shooters from behind... seems more vague and anonymous to me, but others may disagree.

28. a large crowd shot at the Beer Cooling event. this is a"contest and event" happening, but in a semi-public place. maybe i should have been more careful.

29. a large crowded shot during Gringo Warrior. yes, it's the contest and event room... so, would everyone be ok if they wound up in a photo like this simply because they were in that room?


phew, ok... that's a lot of links. i hardly think folk will post about all of them... but maybe a few of these examples will generate some good chatter.