Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 30

Thread: Warning about VIDEO

  1. #1

    Warning about VIDEO

    To all agency owners and service providers.

    I have been in contact recently with an agency owner who informed me about clients (3) that have been cougth recently filming the session with the girls without permission.

    For now, till request, no futher informations will be reveal about the clients, just take notice of it and, for the owners, may inform your girls.
    Dorothy
    The Wizard of Oz
    __________________
    Socrate's Dog - An effective way to cause reflexion without abuse.

  2. #2
    Retired veteran hobbyist
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Eastern Canada
    Posts
    17,824
    Quote Originally Posted by The Wizard of Oz
    I have been in contact recently with an agency owner who informed me about clients (3) that have been cougth recently filming the session with the girls without permission.
    How were they caught?? They should be reported to STELLA so that other agencies and providers have access to their names in order to protect themselves. I know of one person who was caught doing this last August/September and i'm wondering if he's been back & tried it again.

  3. #3

    Post

    So far, I can reveal that one of them was an asian man from de U.S. and the two other are locals from Montreal.

    One of the two locals in Montreal told the girl he had the idea from a friend who did succeed. This "fourth guy" his also in Montreal !
    Dorothy
    The Wizard of Oz
    __________________
    Socrate's Dog - An effective way to cause reflexion without abuse.

  4. #4
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,139
    There have been numerous prior threads on this subject. Two started by Eastender:

    https://merb.cc/vbulletin/showthread...ight=videotape

    https://merb.cc/vbulletin/showthread...ight=videotape

    One started by Doc Holliday and closed by Mod 2:

    https://merb.cc/vbulletin/showthread...ight=videotape

    I think all grounds were covered in those prior threads, including a thorough discussion of the legalities of such practices.

  5. #5

    Hello!????

    I have been in contact again with the agency owner where it happens and find out that these actual situations happens to the same SP!!!

    Now, she is really "pissed off" and warned her boss that the next time it happens she will make a major scandall about it!!!!! She said: "If they realy gave her again the excuse that they wanted a memorie about it ... well they will have a good one! ()

    So, if you read this ... Misters who ever you are (s) ...

    And for EB, well ... it doen's matter if the subject has been covered or not (even do I have to admit that at almost 4 in the morning I didn't took the time to read about your link!) ... Witch I will tomorrow ...

    The most important for now is to say, tell, upgrate about this topic because whatever ... if an SP doesn't allow it ...

    Knowing you, guest your mature enougth so I don't have to explain much more ...
    Dorothy
    The Wizard of Oz
    __________________
    Socrate's Dog - An effective way to cause reflexion without abuse.

  6. #6
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,139
    The Wizard of Oz,

    I think you missed my point, possibly due to not reading the prior threads. The Doc Holliday thread started out the same as yours, but eventually deteriorated, and no names were ever disclosed. My hunch is that the names of the 3 individuals involved will be circulated privately among agency owners, and these guys will be blacklisted by some or all of the agencies they are doing business with.
    Last edited by EagerBeaver; 05-23-2006 at 07:58 AM.

  7. #7
    EsteemedEscortesanCritic
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    MTL
    Posts
    675

    Cool

    I am shocked to see how one sided this is. If I hypothetically videotape an SP encounter, whom I have paid 180-300 dollars to exploit for an hour, and I hide a camera and film my "work", and only use it privately for my own masturbatorial gratification, and do not disseminate/distribute/profit off the film, then I am hurting no one and there is no harm or foul because the SP's privacy has not been compromised and she has no idea.
    We have to right to do anything in our house, just like I could record a conversation with an SP on the phone and masturbate to it if I wish.
    There is no need for alarm.

  8. #8
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,139
    BS,

    Hypothetically you are correct, but in reality the expectation of privacy usually becomes a shattered myth. In some cases tapes are lost or stolen. Ask Paris Hilton, and ask Colin Farrell. Actually nobody seems to have been able to explain how the Farrell videotape fell into the hands of porn producers.

    The bottom line is that the tape owner's perceived notion of privacy is not what determines whether consent must be obtained from the subject of the tape. The consent must be obtained irrespective of how the tape is to be used, or the act of surreptitious taping is illegal. In other words, if you get caught it will not be a valid legal defense to say, "it was only my intention to enjoy private masturbatorial gratification with the tape." The Prosecutor will laugh and he certainly will not give two shits, if the subject's consent was not obtained.

    I believe the law on this was posted elsewhere in one of the other threads. A growing number of jurisdictions have enacted what are called "anti-voyeurism" laws which require consent even if the activity is done in one's own home. There was previously a long discussion of the issue of what one can or should be able to do in terms of taping in one's own home, in one of the prior threads.
    Last edited by EagerBeaver; 05-23-2006 at 08:17 AM.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Board Stiff
    ..................
    We have to right to do anything in our house, just like I could record a conversation with an SP on the phone and masturbate to it if I wish.
    There is no need for alarm.
    The law requires you to inform the other party if you are planning to tape the call. That is why on some business calls there is a message saying that the call may be recorded for quality purposes.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Board Stiff
    We have to right to do anything in our house, just like I could record a conversation with an SP on the phone and masturbate to it if I wish.
    There is no need for alarm.
    Very surprised by this statement.Blatantly false.Simply,outside the context of this board, you cannot do anything illegal in your house or residence,from counterfeiting money,to downloading child porn,to growing pot the list is virtually endless.

  11. #11

    Thumbs up The Hooters case...

    Does anyone remember this case a couple of years ago?


    NBC 4
    Women Who Claim They Were Secretly Videotaped Sue Hooters
    Restaurant Chain Being Sued For Negligent Supervision

    POSTED: 4:36 pm PST March 30, 2004
    UPDATED: 6:31 pm PST March 30, 2004

    LOS ANGELES -- Five women who claim they were secretly videotaped while changing into Hooters uniforms as part of job interviews sued the restaurant chain Tuesday, which disavowed the actions of a former employee.

    Hooters Girls Secretly Taped

    Hooters is an Atlanta-based chain with hundreds of locations throughout the nation and in other countries. It is known for its scantily clad waitresses who wear white, low-cut tank tops and orange shorts. The West Covina restaurant was scheduled to open sometime next month.

    West Covina police say nearly 200 women, ages 17 to 25, were allegedly taped without their knowledge from November to February in a trailer on the Hooters construction site on Garvey Avenue.

    Last month detectives, acting on suspicions of some of the women, found 180 videos of naked and partly naked women on the computer of former Hooters manager Juan Aponte. About 80 women appeared on the videos.

    Aponte, a 32-year-old from Arcadia, has not been charged, but police said they hoped to present a case to prosecutors soon. Authorities have said Hooters is not being investigated criminally and has been cooperative.

    The Los Angeles Superior Court lawsuit was filed on behalf of Jacquelyn Anenberg, Elizabeth Navarrete, Scheana Jancan, and Brittani Moore and Jenna Underwood, both of whom claim they were 17 at the time of the alleged incident.

    Aponte is named as a defendant in the invasion of privacy suit, along with Hooters of America, which is being sued for negligent supervision.

    Mike McNeil of Hooters said he could not comment on the suit because the company had not been served with it.

    "But we can say that Hooters has been commended by the West Covina police, who said thanks to our cooperation, they were able to confiscate the tapes. They are not available on the Internet," he said.

    The computer Aponte allegedly used did not belong to Hooters, McNeil said.

    "All the equipment was owned by one individual, who is no longer employed by Hooters," McNeil said. The incident has been "characterized by police as the conduct of one individual, not of Hooters."

    McNeil added that asking a prospective job candidate to try on the uniform "is specifically prohibited. It's against company policy."

    "It's one person acting outside the scope of company policy," McNeil said. "We're not really sure why Hooters is being sued, but we look forward to seeing the suit and trying to go from there."

    According to the plaintiffs, Aponte asked the women to try on the skimpy uniform so he could "make sure you're comfortable in it" and took photos of them for their "personnel files."

    But the plaintiffs "later discovered that without their consent ... Aponte had videotaped and/or photographed (them) while (they were) disrobing and changing into the Hooters uniform," the suit states.

    Aponte also faces a civil battery claim for allegedly touching some of the plaintiffs while taking photographs.

  12. #12
    EsteemedEscortesanCritic
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    MTL
    Posts
    675

    Cool

    I just put up a disclaimer on my front door next to my mezzuzah that warns all that they may be taped either in the audio or visual domain while in my house.

    ps well said EB

    PS Eastender, I didn't mention anything about legality, i was talking about morally. We already know the laws against taping/voyeurism. Enjoy your pudding de chomeur

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by chef
    The law requires you to inform the other party if you are planning to tape the call. That is why on some business calls there is a message saying that the call may be recorded for quality purposes.
    This is incorrect, at least in Canada.

    Canada is a one party consent jurisdiction as far as criminal liability goes. In other words, you can secretly record any phonecall or live conversation to which you are a party. (You cannot, however, secretly record third parties, even if you own the phone. eg: your wife and her lover)

    The reason businesses in Canada inform you is that under PIPEDA, because they are businesses, they are subject to certain (civil) privacy requirements.

  14. #14
    I heard of people getting caught by putting a camera in the closet and leaving it open a crack to get the action.
    Then thee was this supervisor in New brunswick that worked for the prvincial government that stuck a camera in a bag then put in the th trash of the womens washroom. When they caught him, he commited suicide

  15. #15

    Post

    Karma,

    After reading your post, I have contacted the appropriate person and ask about your last question.

    Here what I got:

    The first one: She found about it in the middle of the session, brougth the guy to go to the bathroom (with somekind of story he was tasting soap), unplug the camera and wait with it for the guy to come back. It has cut the mood, ask for the tape, took it, talk about how disrespectfull it was, went to shower, got paid and left. - Private house.

    The second one: Saw it at the begenning, gave him the most unwanted session (not interested, no talk, no moaning, mechanical). Then tell the guy she knew about the camera, ask for the tape, talk about why she wasn't in the mood, went to shower, got paid (+tip!) and left. - Hotel room.

    The third one: She found about it in the middle of the session, ask for the tape, the guy didn't want to give it because he tougth that because he paid for an hour he was allowed to do so. She warned him that she would call her boss, what she finally had to do, her boss talk to the guy. He erased the session and she look at the tape after. He needed other stuff on the tape. Showered, got paid and left. - Private house.

    Also, in the 3 cases, she warned the guys that they were very courageous to do that because, like you just mention, it could be with a girl who will just brake something. But now she's getting nervous, pissed off and she says i will eventually happen if it doesn't stop.

    After having a talk with her she said: ''It's sad because after some people wonder why the girls change there attittude ...''.

    I guest I understand and thanks for sharing that.
    Dorothy
    The Wizard of Oz
    __________________
    Socrate's Dog - An effective way to cause reflexion without abuse.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •