Press/Photos/Video restrictions

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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 $$.

[Dark Tangent]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

Let me see what the current wording we ask the press to comply with, and see if we should make changes. This has been a good discussion.

[DaKahuna]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

Yes, yes, I know. I'm often unpleasant for no reason whatsoever. Still, if there's a rule against it, and someone violates the rule, and I hurt them, they'll be less surprised.

Frankly the only time I have ever seen you unpleasant has been when:
(1) Someone served you decaffeinated coffee
(2) You have not had you daily quota of caffeine or
(3) Someone let their children under 25 run around unsupervised and they intruded on your space.

Personally, I told one person many years ago not to take my picture. He did anyway and I took the camera from him forcibly and removed the film (shows you how long ago that was).

Someone I don't know wants to take my picture, just ask - I'll agree or disagree depending on my mood.

[renderman]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

I actually want to be in everyone's pictures. Please come find me. You can attach whatever name you want to my likeness. Render, Deviant, Chris, DT, shrdlu, Wiz, or anybody else you want to claim is in your pic. Game on.

Living cardboard stand in, I like this idea.

[Club81]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

I actually want to be in everyone's pictures. Please come find me. You can attach whatever name you want to my likeness. Render, Deviant, Chris, DT, shrdlu, Wiz, or anybody else you want to claim is in your pic. Game on.

[renderman]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

Attendees, for their personal amusement, if I happen to be in the background, it's not an issue for me. My beef has always been with the mainstream media.

The major issue is that with the crowds the size they are, it's hard to tell sometimes when they may be setting up a shot or something until it's too late. Other than the press badges, I've always advocated higher visibility for press through the use of bright orange prison issue jumpsuits, this way you can spot them a mile away and avoid them if you so choose (or pelt them with tomato's if that's your thing)

Like Deviant I try and avoid any wide shots and will ask out loud if anyone minds if I take a pic if it is a wider shot. There is no shame in speaking up to protect your privacy, and I cant think of any situations where the photo needing to be taken would trump that.

So speak up dammit!

[shrdlu]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

I am tracking you down and taking your picture this year. COUNT ON IT!

Hah! Sounds like a preemptive strike is called for, then. You better be wearing shin guards. In addition, you are a lot easier to find than I am. Track me down? I'm a master of disguise. I often look just like Cot, for example. I've been told the resemblance is remarkable.

[Chris]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

I'd have voted on your poll, but there's no slot for my vote. I don't agree with you, but only because I think it's not restrictive enough. Yes, I recognize that people are going to take my picture without my permission, but I'd still like it to be against the rules. Not just stricter rules for the big names, but for everyone.

As anyone who knows me would recognize, I can become very unpleasant if you point a camera my way and don't pay attention to the fact that I am telling you NOT to take a picture. Yes, yes, I know. I'm often unpleasant for no reason whatsoever. Still, if there's a rule against it, and someone violates the rule, and I hurt them, they'll be less surprised.

Truthfully, I agree with your rules, but think they're too polite, and don't include the all-important addition of:

0) Shrdlu is allowed to break one bone for each still photograph, and to cause moderate internal injury for each video.

I think that's only fair. No jokes about my not being able to hit above the belt due to height, either. I can always stand on a chair.

I am tracking you down and taking your picture this year. COUNT ON IT!

[shrdlu]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

I would like the rules to basically be this:
1) Big name news (cnn, nbc, cnet, univision, anything most people can name) have to register as press. No footage of attendees (including crowd shots, hallways, etc). They already have an "interview room" set aside for people who want to be interviewed.
2) Small time bloggers, youtube, flickr, etc (most people) don't have to register, but crowd pans, interviews, etc are discouraged (ie, interviewees need their back to a wall, etc)
3) Constant audio or video recording is outright banned. No "surveillance" or secretive recording.

I'd have voted on your poll, but there's no slot for my vote. I don't agree with you, but only because I think it's not restrictive enough. Yes, I recognize that people are going to take my picture without my permission, but I'd still like it to be against the rules. Not just stricter rules for the big names, but for everyone.

As anyone who knows me would recognize, I can become very unpleasant if you point a camera my way and don't pay attention to the fact that I am telling you NOT to take a picture. Yes, yes, I know. I'm often unpleasant for no reason whatsoever. Still, if there's a rule against it, and someone violates the rule, and I hurt them, they'll be less surprised.

Truthfully, I agree with your rules, but think they're too polite, and don't include the all-important addition of:

0) Shrdlu is allowed to break one bone for each still photograph, and to cause moderate internal injury for each video.

I think that's only fair. No jokes about my not being able to hit above the belt due to height, either. I can always stand on a chair.

[Deviant Ollam]

Re: Press/Photos/Video restrictions

i'll add my name to the chorus of voices who liked the old rules. as always, if you wind up in a photo or DC Shoot video of mine accidentally, please just let me know and i'll remove/edit things.

also, when i ask "does anyone here not want to be on camera" when i'm hosting a contest, that means SPEAK UP. if i didn't care what you thought, i would ask in a leading manner like "you don't mind being on camera, do you?"

we really do want to know who wishes to remain out of sight as far as photos and video are concerned. just speak up and it's our pleasure to respect your wishes.