Pixiq

I’m not entirely sure I can agree with you on this. Although everyone should have a legal right to take photographs of what and whom they want, even as a non-famous person I would object to someone coming up to me and taking my photograph whilst I’m just trying to buy a coffee. Perhaps Damon did not act in the appropriate way, and should have explained that he would prefer not to have his photograph taken, rather than ignoring the situation and letting his friends get aggressive about it.

If we have a right to take photographs whenever we want, do we also not have a right to chose not to be photographed when we are not partaking in anything illegal or anything more interesting than buying a cup of coffee?

Jennifer,

The law in the U.S. recognizes that if one steps out in public, regardless if they are simply buying a cup of coffee, they are legally allowed to be photographed.

However, if that person happens to walk into a private coffeeshop, the coffeeshop owners have a right to tell that photographer to leave the premises.

But in this case, the incident took place in a Miami night spot, one of many spots where everybody takes photos, which is evident if you just look through Facebook.

The other thing is that since Matt Damon is considered a “public figure”, he actually has less of an expectation of privacy than non-celebrities or politicians.

But nobody has really been debating the legality of the photography issue in this case.

It’s been mostly Matt Damon fans who are offended that somebody would dare try to photograph him against his wishes.

Hey Carlos, longtime reader, rare-time poster.

Here’s the hazy part, and I’ll probably ask our resident attorney over lunch today just for kicks.

As a background, I run around clubs and concert venues in town, taking the odd social image for a variety of clients. I’m in the venue with the approval of the venue management.

Now, after years of doing this, the line I’ve always gotten is that clubs and bars are private property, and the policy on photos is set by the management. Typically it’s “no photos unless you have the consent of the management”. And it used to be a blanket prohibition. The proliferation of camera phones and cheap point and shoots has made this policy hard to enforce, everywhere. Club security typically leaves you alone if you are just taking photos with a Cybershot or a camera phone.

But here’s where it gets complicated. A club or a bar is a place of public accommodation, much like a mall. So if the issue was really pursued, that is where it gets hazy.

Now maybe this where I differ from other people who shoot. If I saw Matt Damon out and about, I wouldn’t bother “getting the shot” unless it was truly newsworthy, or if there was an arrangement of sorts, i.e. on occasion my client will personally want a photo with celebrities in his or her venue for PR reasons. But, I’m not going to go out of my way for a celebrity shot. It’s just not worth the aggravation for a debatable financial return.

In Miami, Bro’s situation, I would have dealt with it and walked away. Though conversely, Damon chose his career path with all the attendant annoyances, so he should have called off his goons. In this case, no one is really in the right. Miami, Bro was pushy, and Damon (or his people) were being rude right back.

It seems to me the difference we are talking about is between what is legal and what is polite. It is the reason why so many people despise the paparazzi.

When you are talking about the police and photographing a crime scene you can make a compelling case that what is impolite can be necessary for the public good. You can’t really make that case with a famous guy just trying to live his life.

Yeah, you can legally harass the guy because he is a public figure in a public space and yada, yada, yada…. but it serves no public interest but your own. It is crossing into the ‘douchebag zone’.

I knew you would be all over this Carlos. The bottom line is that, sure, MB had the right to take his picture but Damon also had the right to tell her to fuck off and/or block the photo from being taken. To think someone is an asshole for not enjoying having pictures snapped of them while they are out trying to relax is just plain douchebaggery.

It seems to me that both parties acted immaturely.
If I saw someone famous, (not that I would recognize anyone other than Sean Connery or Clint Eastwood), I would walk up and ask them if I could have a picture. If they said no, walking away, or honoring their wishes is the polite thing to do. This has nothing to do with the law, except that of common courtesy.
His friends overreacted though.

Agreed 100% Blind Mind. Last time I shot a celebrity “off the cuff”, i.e. not counting red carpet arrivals or concerts, was Paris Hilton in 2005. The party coordinator asked for an image with her, so I said to him “Set it up, and I’ll do it, if she says no, I’ll be at the bar with some drinks for you and me…”

She was cool with it, so I delivered. In and out in 5 seconds.

But if they don’t want it, don’t push the issue, you just come across as a lowlife pap.

My friend does this, and let me say that I am super embarrassed when she just clicks away without asking.

The last comment I tried posting didn’t show up, so I’ll summarize.

These people are now asking for an apology from me for writing what I wrote, and claiming that I harassed this guy.

I am totally serious about and well informed of my First Amendment rights.

This is absolute lunacy. All I did was walk up and take a picture. Rude? Kinda. That’s it.

I actually looked up the photo, and one of the dudes with them was LAUGHING. Yes, laughing. I’m just overwhelmed by these headcases so obsessed with someone they don’t even know, or who showed them 2 seconds of attention once that they would turn around and harass me for telling my story.

I’m going there right now, bringing it to the next level, making it political: I feel like I am speaking truth to power.

Power needs to get over it and so do these obsessives.

Thanks for your support. I need it!

If Matt asks for no photos (or friends say no), then please respect their/his privacy. The moment you step over that line, you’re paparazzi. You should get treated like paparazzi. Get a life if after asking permission you still take a photo. Don’t complain here about it.

I think the reason Matt went to Poplife/White Room was to get away from the hordes of script-flingers, pap, autograph brokers, and process servers that infest more mainstream clubs.

At the end of the day though, they did tell the blogger in question no, and that should have been enough reason to walk away. Now, I can kinda maybe sympathize with celeb worship, I mean, I’d maybe want an image with some famous person from my hometown (then again, aside from Rachael Ray, I am the most famous person from my hometown), but if they or their friends/agents told me to go away, I would.

I have to agree with “Blind Mind” above. You’re a douchebag if you ask someone for a photo, they decline and you then proceed to try and get a shot anyway. It’s behavior like this that gives photographers a bad name.

You could argue that Damon’s friends could have been more polite in their response, but then again, how often does it happen that someone feels entitled to a snapshot with the celebrity – simply because they happen to be in the vicinity. If you spot a celebrity in public, by all means snap away – but don’t be a jerk about it.

If someone doesn’t want to pose for/with you, that’s their right and you should respect that, no matter whether that person is a celebrity or not. She was being rude and intrusive.

I respect and admire Matt Damon quite a bit – he’s a rare bird when it comes to Hollywood celebs. He’s smart, thoughtful, and engaged.

I also think the public tends to have a very shitty, possessive, disrespectful attitude when it comes to celebs in public.

I don’t feel like this fits well into the “photographer’s rights” conversation, and incidents and attitudes like these tend to seriously diminish the credibility of those of us who fight that (serious) battle.

Further, the photographer was on private property.

You not own these people. Even if it were public property, there’s a huge difference between what’s legal and what’s polite and decent for one human being to do to another.

It sounds to me like the photographer was just plain fucking rude, and if I were Damon I would have done and said the same thing.

“Thanks for your support. I need it!”

Miami Bro,

Perhaps you haven’t read any of the comments but it’s pretty unanimous that no one is supporting you on this. As a matter of fact the most common descriptive term for your behavior was ‘douchebag’.

“I’m going there right now, bringing it to the next level, making it political: I feel like I am speaking truth to power. ”

I hope they taze your crazy, celebrity obsessed ass.

Listen, Captain Brain. I’m thanking Carlos for the empathy. That’s who I was thanking. The one with insight and conscience.

It’s funny how people are harassing the hell out of me because I wrote a sarcastic jokey blog about someone I could care less about.

His friends never told me NOT to take a picture, the one guy talked down to me and tried pawning me off on his friend. If you understand anything about gender politics, you’d understand who was rude first.

I don’t care about celebs. Really don’t. I care about politics a whole lot more. You’re the ones who fixated on my one celebrity blog and disregarded all of my commentary on the state of the world’s political climate.

Guys, you’re all hung up on how “horrible” you think I was to rich Matt Damon (by clicking the shutter on my camera and walking away), yet you think it’s appropriate to call a woman a “douchebag,” again and again. I’m sure if you all “were Damon,” you WOULD have done the same.

It seems that everybody is upset because Miami Bro was “rude” for trying to take Matt Damon’s picture against his wishes.

My question is, since when did everybody get so nice?

Every time I interact with people in real life, they are rude as hell, whether it be in traffic, in the store or at the Post Office.

So considering we are no longer living in the era of Victorian Age etiquette, why is everybody so shocked that Miami Bro defied Matt Damon’s wishes?

And it’s not like he was trying to have a nice peaceful dinner with his family. He was in a bar where rules of etiquette are even more lax.

Plus, he is also a celebrity, which means these type of things come with the territory.

As I said in my original post, if I were sitting next to him in a bar, I would try to get a photo because I would either try to sell it to some celebrity magazine or Splash photo agency, or I would post it on my blog along with a story.

You see, Matt Damon doesn’t pay my bills and odds are I will never run into him again. And it’s unlikely he would ever be in a position to hire me for a job.

In other words, he is no different than the guy I cut off in traffic who curses me out for being rude.

But if there is a chance I could make a few bucks of the photo when the guy happens to be standing a few feet away from me, I will ask him if I could take his photo and if he says no, I will take it anyway.

And if he just reacts as if I’m just another paparazzi and ignores me, the photo, along with the story, will be boring.

But if he starts getting all angry and yelling at me, that’s an even better photo and a better story.

Now I don’t get paid for operating this blog, but that doesn’t mean I haven’t been seeking ways to make money off it.

So naturally, I need to ensure a steady dose of blog posts that attract readership.

And a photo and story of seeing Matt Damon in a bar would attract a certain readership, as the comments in Miami Bro’s post proves.

It could be a story where Matt Damon allows me to take his photos, answers a couple of questions and goes on with his night as I will with my night.

Or it could be a story where Matt Damon and friends refuse a photo and then yell at me when I take the photo anyway.

Which story do you think would attract the most traffic?

The point is, nobody is guaranteed complete privacy when they step out into public. Sure, the bar might be privately owned but it allows anybody in as long as they show ID and pay the cover charge, if there is one.

So it’s not as private as your home, where you, me and Matt Damon are guaranteed complete privacy.

I never knew Matt Damon was the new Jesus Christ. Where were these people when our civil liberties were getting flushed down the toilet by the Bush Administration…but oh-no!, don’t invade Matt Damon’s privacy, especially at POPLIFE (a hipster club) where they always have a million hipster blogger photographers taking pictures of drunk girls exposing their bressases.

I would also like to point out for those who are crying out that this bar is “private property”, there probably is also a whole network of closed circuit cameras watching your every move.

Probably not. White Room probably can’t afford CCTV except over the cash registers. I saw a pretty sophisticated one in and the pricetag blew my mind. When I was in “the box”, a banned patron came to the door, and with the system’s assistance, security was on him before he even got to the rope.

It’s like that scene in whichever one of the Matrix sequels sucked. Oh wait, they both did. CCTV isn’t cheap to install and deploy.

That being said, I can understand a certain commercial motivation for an image. But the celeb-oriented market here in Miami is owned by a select few, and they’re the ones getting the big bucks. Oddly enough, they got it by being personable and respectful of celebrities’ personal space and privacy. Quick payoff versus longtime cashflow. They get the exclusives and the access.

Now, Miami, bro is not one of those select few. She’s a blogger. Like Shogun points out, they’re like maggots on a corpse at this specific venue. Though word on the street is that’s gonna change.

Maybe Damon should have been aware of that? This little tiff is too murky to assign blame to one party or the other. Miami, bro was out of line for being pushy for a photo for her blog, and Damon’s people were being a little pushy themselves.

Such is life I guess.

pod,

I’ve never set foot in the place.

The thing is, pod, just because the celebrity-photo market is dominated by a few photographers doesn’t mean everybody else has to refrain from photographing him.

And even if Miami Bro is just a blogger doesn’t mean she can’t take the photo either.

She might end up getting kicked out of the joint or she might end up getting yelled at by Damon’s entourage, but there’s always a risk when you pull out your camera, as you can read by all the stories on my blog.

And a few people brought up his “privacy”, just check out the website of the bar where this occurred on the link below.

Does this look like the kind of place one would go to and demand “privacy”?

Look at the photo on the right side of the home page. The tattoo on the knuckles reads “exposure”.

http://www.whiteroommiami.com/

Wow, i’ve never seen such hostility and animosity for no reason before!

While living in Los Angeles, i ran into celebrities all the time, and if you treat them like regular citizens that you happen to know from somewhere, they’re ok.

It seems Damon was having a bad day, or his friends were drunk and he was amused. He didn’t (they didn’t) recognize the photog, so they thought “no harm no foul” – right?

Well it’s really a minor story, and to see people getting this worked up about it and have names being flung left and right is just obnoxious. (flung mostly left, it seems, though).

I’m with Miami, bro and carlos on this. In that we should be allowed to snap photos like this. I don’t really care if someone yells at me for it, either.

It’s more of a non-moral issue, for me.

Genewitch,

If you think it’s bad here, check out Thomas Hawk’s friendfeed.

Hawk, who linked to my story, is a San Francisco blogger and photographer who frequently writes and supports photographer rights.

And his readers usually do so as well. Bu not in this case.

I really have to check out this guy’s movies. Apparently they’re pretty mesmerizing.

I can understand that people might have different opinions on this, but I’m blown away by the viciousness this subject has exposed.

Calling her a “cunt” and a “bitch” and an “ass” because she took a photo of a fucking movie star?

It’s not surprising that more people vote for American Idol than the presidential election in this country.

“I probably wouldn’t even recognize Damon if I were sitting next to him at the bar considering how oblivious I am to Hollywood stars.”

It was at this point I started to question whether you were telling the truth.

Forgive me if I don’t recognize the messiah but Matt Damon looks like your typical all-American guy, which you will find in any bar.

Damon is a terrible actor – a piece of cardboard. But he did write “Good Will Hunting” and is perfect as an amnesiac in the Bourne movies.

I’m not saying she doesn’t have a right. We all have the right to take photos of people, places, and things, as you’ve gone way above and beyond the call of duty (round of applause) to demonstrate to us all.

I think the word I was grasping for earlier is tact. In this case, Miami, bro (damn that comma) wasn’t being tactful, and neither was Matt Damon’s crew.

Oddly enough, this is epidemic to celeb-land, often the celebs are alright, but the entourage needs a reality check.

Well then I guess they both should be scolded my Miss Manners.

Meanwhile, I’ve pissed off the Matt Damon Fan Brigade, a fan who calls this post “vile”.

http://mattdamoncolumn.livejournal.com/230759.html?thread=1500007#t1500007

Once again it’s the difference between what is legal and what is polite.

“But if there is a chance I could make a few bucks of the photo when the guy happens to be standing a few feet away from me, I will ask him if I could take his photo and if he says no, I will take it anyway.”

OK. If you couldn’t give a crap about being polite and treat them accordingly don’t be surprised if they do the same to you.

John,

It’s not even that anymore. All these people claiming to have the high moral ground when it comes to common courtesy really displayed a lack of class and a lack of respect for women in berating Miami Bro.

It’s no longer about the legalities or the courtesies of photography.

It’s about the hypocrisies.

Stories like this take away from the importance of the rest of the great issues on this site.

She was called a cunt because she was acting like a cunt. If a dude were doing the same thing they’d call him a dick or whatever.

Carlos: If person A is sitting at a bar next to person B, and person A suddenly turns into person A’s space and fires off a flash, person A will get his ass kicked. And most people will applaud the beat-down.

It would be entirely different if person A were to retreat to the far side of the room and zoom in for a shot. There’s simply no excuse for getting up in someone’s face without invitation. Ever. You may have the law on your side, but you’ll still be wrong.

If Person B is a movie star, then he should expect lots of lawsuits if he goes around kicking everybody’s ass who tries to take his photo in public.

If Person B is not a movie star, he can probably breathe easy because chances are, no stranger is going to want his photo.

I think the problem here is everybody is trying to put themselves in Matt Damon’s shoes as to how they would react if they were standing in a popular nightclub with a group of friends and some stranger tried to take their photo.

The truth is, most people, me included, can stand with a group of friends all night long and nobody is going to be wanting our photos.

But if we had Matt Damon’s celebrity status, we would have to accept that this is a reality. Do you really think was an isolated incident?

This is the price of the fame that he so desperately wanted. Nothing comes cheap. Especially fame.

Roger:
Is that how everyone you know solves social problems? By “giving a beatdown”? You barbaric little bastard. You’d “beat down” a girl that took your photo in a bar?

ARE YOU SERIOUS?

If we’re going to pretend we’re matt damon (protip: you can’t begin to fathom); why don’t we pretend we’re the photog here, too.

Matt Damon is just another dude, and his friends are just dudes too. taking pictures of dudes is still legal in this country (as long as your camera makes a clicking sound). Therefore, any other argument is moot, and merely trolling.

So stop trolling. No one really cares what a huge in the closet (or out of the closet) crush you have on mister Damon. He doesn’t need your defense any more than he needed all his friends to defend him from that
Poor
Alone
Camera-holding
Girl
That assaulted him!!!!!!111111eleven

I have been a very active defender of photographers’ rights, taking matters to the media and elected officials, with a lot of good results.

But I’m on Damon’s side in this one.

And with deep respect to you, Carlos, I’m against your scenario of snapping a photo of a person sitting next to you at a restaurant, simply because they are famous.

Who decides the definition of famous? In many parts of this country, the local weatherman is considered a celebrity. Snap his pic while he’s eating, sitting next to you, just because he’s a notable person?

And let’s look at this from exactly the same perspective we employ in defending our rights while shooting in public. What is, specifically, the “reasonable expectation of privacy” in a private club (albeit a large one)? It isn’t public space, it’s within doors, it’s a private establishment, and the subject has already declined having their picture taken.

There is a certain giddy immaturity that fuels our celebrity culture. Most people seem incapable of calming down, growing up, and letting celebrity so-and-so just walk down the street, go shopping, have lunch, or whatever.

At what point does your titillation trump simple human etiquette? What is this need people have to somehow capture the moment where they were in the presence of a celebrity? I honestly don’t get the validation people get from that moment. Big deal. The person is known, they’re all over TV, they get around, they don’t know nor care who you are, you’re just one of millions they’ve encountered.

I’m happy to enjoy the celebrity for their work product. If they’re good at what they do, and if the situation genuinely lends itself to some chat (not forcing yourself into the situation to chat with them), it’s nice to say you appreciate their work.

That’s it. Everything else about these giddy “HEY YOU’LL NEVER GUESS WHO WAS STANDING RIGHT NEXT TO ME” moments is puzzling to me.

Joel,

We’ve never met in person but I am a very personable person. I’ve been told many times that I come across much more serious on my blog than I am in real life.

If I were in a noisy crowded club as this club was, and it turns out that Matt Damon were there, I would probably want to get a photo because if anything, it would be an interesting blog post.

But believe me, I am the last person to get giddy over celebrities. The last movie I saw in a theater was Sicko and that’s because I was writing a review about it for a local website, not to mention that I was an extra in the movie.

Most of my “idols” are dead, including Jimi Hendrix and Frank Sinatra.

I am a huge Stones fan, however, so I might get a little excited if I’m in the same bar with Keith Richards.

And I’ve always had a crush on Shakira, so she might get me excited as well.

But other than that, celebrities mean nothing to me. I don’t remember ever seeing a Matt Damon movie, but I like the guy because he spoke out against Sarah Palin when the nation was enamored with her.

Now if I had asked Matt Damon’s entourage to take his photo, I would have done so in a jovial, friendly manner. But if they would have said no, I would have seen it as a challenge because that’s the journalist in me.

And no, I’m not a paparazzi but I figure if you’re in a noisy, crowded club, then you really shouldn’t be surprised if someone is taking your photo.

You don’t even have to be Matt Damon for this to happen. Just take a look at the club’s website. They are pretty photo happy.

http://www.whiteroommiami.com/

We’re not talking discrete, candlelight dinner here.

So yes, I would have snapped his photo because it would have made an interesting blog post and I’m a little stubborn when it comes to these things.

And really, I wouldn’t expect them to lose sleep over it. They might have yelled at me but if they insist on dwelling over it, then it’s their stupidity.

I’m really surprised at how so many people are shocked by the “rudeness” of all this because when I go to clubs, I get people spilling drinks on me or knocking my drink over without apologizing.

I get down-talked by beefy security guards because I don’t happen to be on the “list”.

I get elbowed on the dance floor without apologies.

I get overcharged for watered-down drinks.

So it’s a pretty “rude” atmosphere. But that’s the way it is. I’m not going to change that. I can only choose to avoid the clubs, which is why I mostly do.

My point is, if Matt Damon really didn’t want to get photographed that night, then he should have avoided a noisy, trendy and crowded Miami nightclub.

Deep down inside it’s traffic, I’m willing to bet. Miami, bro, as a blogger, seeks traffic. She’s got an Etsy banner ad and some Google stuff.

Posting about Matt Damon will bring the traffic, and it has.

I must say, this is starting to remind me of my website with all the fighting. I’m virulent. I should probably stop commenting.

But Pod, it’s not even “deep down inside”.

For me, it’s all about traffic. I certainly wouldn’t take Matt Damon’s photo to hang on my wall.

I look at my blog as a news source. I provide articles, commentary, personal experiences, photos and videos.

I am a professional journalist who chose to drop out of the corporate media, so I am seeking a way where I can make money without giving up my independence.

So if I were in that club, I would put myself on the same level as any photographer from People magazine.

And do you think they will refrain from taking the photo because Matt Damon didn’t want to be photographed?

People Magazine might have more circulation and have more money and have more influence than I do, but when it comes down to taking his photograph in a crowded nightclub, I’m on par with any paparazzi.

And just like People Magazine and newspapers are always trying to increase their circulation, I’m always seeking to increase my traffic.

I’m just trying to follow the American Dream and carve myself a niche in this New Media market.

Just as Matt Damon pursued his dream to become a world famous actor.

But please don’t stop commenting because you’re are being very rational in your comments.

And let me just add, the fact that Matt Damon was in White Room is a newsworthy item. That cannot be denied.

It is why it was mentioned in the Miami New Times and the Miami Herald.

http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2009/01/spotted_matt_damon_at_whi...

http://blogs.herald.com/scene_in_the_tropics/2009/01/matt-damon-lied.html

As an independent journalist who has more experience than many of the journalists for either of these papers, not to mention worked for larger circulation newspapers, I don’t see myself any differently.

I would have tried to get an interview and a photo on a friendly basis, but if that wouldn’t work, I would have taken the photo anyway.

The rest of you who are so concerned about Matt Damon’s feelings, well I would never hire you for my newspaper.

It’s funny, because I didn’t even recognize Matt Damon at first. I just wanted a picture to show my friends and laugh about. Famous people are anomalies. If a guy with three heads walked up, I’d take a picture of him, too. I like oddities (believe it or not).

I also am NOTceleb obsessed and I seriously have not seen more than a few MD movies. I know NOTHING about him. He just happened to be the famous guy next to me, and the one who seemingly needed all this protection from my piece of crap camera.

And to be honest, I do not like being told no, authoritative garbage infuriates me. I know everyone has a hard on for this guy, but to me, he’s nobody special!!! How does that translate to me being a giddy pre-teen?

You have to read the last few comments on my blog though, they’re quite interesting in their moronic accusations. I guess some people don’t understand my humor.

It’s great this has become an ethical debate though, because I have my freaking master’s in religious studies. I can talk ethics all day and all night long. I’d rather not do it in a comment though. I’ll write a blog about it that no one will read unless I say I punched Pam Anderson in the boob or something.

Carlos: I agree that fame carries a price, and I have little patience for those who whine incessantly about that price. But to me, your scenario has less to do with photography than an invasion of personal space, something I don’t think anyone (celebrity or otherwise) should be expected to endure.

Again, I’m not arguing against stepping back a few paces and taking a photo of someone. I do that all the time. But I don’t do it when I’m within an arm’s length because they deserve the room and opportunity to get away from me.

Roger,

I don’t know where all this talk started about Miami, Bro getting in Damon’s face with her camera.

I just had to re-read her post because I’ve seen that accusation on several threads now but I don’t see where she claimed to do that.

She said, “I walked up and took a picture and they all started yelling at me.”

Sure, she said she went in for the “camera kill” but I don’t think that literally means she tried to stab Damon with the camera.

And in my post, all I said was that I would try to get a photograph of Damon the “nice way or the hard way.”

I didn’t mean that I would walk up to his face at point-blank range and snap the shutter.

Those type of photos always come out distorted and overexposed anyway.

So I agree that he has “personal space” as we all do, meaning nobody wants anybody’s hands or face near their own face.

But that still won’t stop me from taking his photo because that can be managed by standing a few feet away.

Genewitch: I’m going to make the (potentially regrettable) assumption that there’s something well-meaning under all that bubbling anger of yours and seek to clarify.

(1) I haven’t punched anyone since I was twelve. Partially because I’m a wuss, but mostly because I make a point of not invading other folks’ personal bubbles or otherwise antagonizing them unnecessarily.

(2) I was responding directly to a theoretical scenario proposed by Carlos, not the plight of Ms. Miami or anyone else.

(3) “Legal”is not a synonym for “right”. If it were, then the rash of anti-photography laws we’ve seen put forth over the last few years would be undeniably good things.

(4) The Bourne movies kinda sucked.

Carlos: You suggested a scenario where you were sitting next to someone at a bar, and that’s what I’m keying on. To me, arm’s length is too close.

Ifr you meant something different, then I misunderstood.

Real photographers don’t use FLASHES

ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWAH.

I’m sorry, Carlos, but I feel you are undermining the credibility of your positions and work elsewhere on this superb blog, by coming to the defense of an invasive young woman, proud of her lack of manners, going for the “camera kill” despite a request being declined, inside a private establishment.

Everything you’ve advocated otherwise depends upon educating security guards and other authorities on the boundaries that exist, and which protect us.

Now, you’re willing to fudge, abandon and flat out ignore those boundaries, if it gets the photograph you wish, or if it gets this young woman some extra blog trafffic.

Multiple exclamation marks and adolescent grammar aside, I still do not place much stock in Miami,Bro’s ethical credentials in this matter. She began all this by complaining about Matt Damon and friends taking umbrage, asking her if she thought herself in a zoo.

Now, she proudly asserts she would treat a human being with a birth defect in the same manner, taking what she claims to be her right–a photo within close range, inside a private club, despite a request being denied.

She feels the right to treat other human beings like zoo animals on display, but reserves the right to take offense when challenged for treating people as if they are zoo animals.

I think we all get the drift here, and it’s that all this young woman wants is everything her way, period, and contortions of linear thought are included free of charge.

Joel,

As I explained in previous comments, I am looking at this through the eyes of a journalist.

And journalists do not have any more legal rights than non-journalists, which is why I defend Miami, Bro.

You call this a “private establishment” as if it were some high brow private club with private membership and a dress code.

The website shows this is a place where women walk around in lingerie and the men walk around with cheap t-shirts if they’re wearing a shirt at all.

In other words, there is a prevalent “anything goes” attitude here. I don’t know if you’ve ever been clubbing in Miami, but that is pretty much the norm.

So I am not fudging any boundaries. This was a newsworthy photo. And that’s it.

Yes, I’ve been clubbing in Miami, thanks. Seen a lot in some Miami clubs, but never once assumed I was on public property, nor assumed that my rights as a photog were dependent upon patron clothing or rambunctious behavior.

I would not have persisted in seeking out a photo for my personal blogging pleasure, esp. if repeated attempts to plead for the opportunity had already been denied.

Now, if you’re willing to place Miami,Bro on the same footing with a working photojournalist, that is your rhetorical right. Let’s run with it.

If she’d been a real working photog, she would have been kicked out of the establishment after taking the image.

And I’m sure she would have been just pleased as punch and accepting of that fate.

Right.

And you’ve cautiously sidestepped the very scenario you presented earlier: sitting immediately next to a celebrity, you feel it would be your right and/or obligation to take a photo. Private property, well within arm’s length, and you’re going to get that photo.

And you’d be hustled out by security. And given all your other excellent work on here, what would you write about being hustled out?

Roger,

I guess I have to detail my every step.

I am probably the only guy in the country who doesn’t have a camera on my cell phone so it’s not like I would even be able to reach up to stick a camera in his face from a sitting position if he were next to me.

Usually I have a small camera in a belt pouch or I have an SLR in a backpack.

And I really don’t feel like detailing every step of the way here, but there is a process in me pulling out a camera, asking if I could take a photo, positioning myself so I can get a decent composition, setting the camera so it can go off with the current lighting situation, etc.

Joel,

If you feel obligated not to take photos because you happen to be inside a nightclub, then speak for yourself.

And I’m just stating the facts when I say journalists do not have anymore rights than non-journalists.

Some journalists might not like it but it’s the truth.

And besides, then what’s next, only journalists from a certain publication are allowed to take photos?

And read the above comment as far the sitting next to him thing. I guess next time I have to go into detail with every damn post I write, even if it keeps me up all night.

And really, Joel, I really don’t care if I get kicked out the club.

The people who work the clubs down here are a bunch of arrogant assholes anyway.