Picture source @Visual China
Text | Music Herald, author | Ding Qianwen, editor | Fan Zhihui
In the era of social media, the world is secretly photographed.
Recently, with Xue Zhiqian’s announcement about the “candid photography” incident during the viewing process of the movie “Flying Life 2”, it has become a hot search topic several times, and candid filming, or candid filming, has once again entered the field of public opinion. There were even ridiculous scenes where fans imitated filming movies and concerts and posted pictures to "support" Joker Xue.
At the New York concert on February 18, Xue Zhiqian was also suspected of responding to the stolen camera incident again, saying, "I heard that you humans have two faces, one in society and one on the Internet. In society You must be polite and deceptive on the Internet, but you have to be a troll on the Internet.”
Interestingly, some netizens also compared the candid filming in movie theaters with the fan-filmed videos circulated at concerts, music festivals and other performances. In addition to the raging accusations from online public opinion, perhaps it is more worth thinking about why illegal filming in movie theaters and performance scenes is repeatedly prohibited.
Why is it that illegal filming is often prohibited during music performances?
Of course, this is not the only case of screen-filming controversy caused by singers. Many singers have publicly apologized for sharing and distributing screen-filmed movies in movie theaters.
For example, in 2021, rapper Naiwan was criticized for posting plot pictures related to the movie "Revolutionaries" filmed in a theater. He later deleted the Weibo in question and issued an apology.
After all, most musicians are no strangers to stealing photos. In music performances, an area hardest hit by stolen photos, even if a large number of performances explicitly prohibit the taking of any pictures, videos, or recordings, stolen photos are still rampant. Many musicians, including Joker Xue, have had their concert pirated videos go viral. "victim".
It is worth noting that unlike movies, which can be considered stolen as long as they are shot behind the dragon mark, music performances will be distinguished between allowing full-site filming or explicitly prohibiting filming. Opponents of such as Wu Qingfeng and Caodong No Party have all proposed refusing to film on site.
However, considering the special nature of music performances, the appeal of live performances can also attract potential audiences. Most performers will not suppress or stop them, but will adopt an attitude of encouragement and acquiescence. For example, musicians such as Yang Naiwen and Wei Ruxuan have taken the initiative to ask the audience to take videos and pictures at the concert, and also reminded the audience to pay attention to the cameras to avoid the stage laser radiation.
However, the popular education about prohibiting illegal filming during performances is not very popular. In the eyes of most viewers, paying to watch a performance means having the right to come and go freely within the venue. Therefore, many YouTubers, Douyin bloggers, etc. will also share the location of their viewing area and the equipment they use as "performance experience" with netizens. Even if Wu Qingfeng repeatedly urges people to put down their mobile phones before and after performances, it is difficult to suppress the public's desire to share every moment in this era of social media.
What's more, although there are a large number of stolen images of music performances, according to the Copyright Law, "merely for personal study, research or appreciation, the use of other people's published works is exempt from liability." This also means that on the premise of not harming the legitimate rights and interests of the copyright owner, it is difficult to identify the purpose of stealing photos that are "fan behavior". Whether the rights can be successfully defended depends on fate.
For example, last year's more than two-hour stolen video of Li Zongsheng's Shanghai concert went viral on the Internet. There were even versions from multiple angles and different performances, but ultimately nothing happened. However, at the Shanghai stop of radwimps Asia tour, although it was clearly announced that filming was prohibited, some stolen videos were uploaded and were removed from the shelves after radwimps complained.
In addition, even in the fields of musicals and concerts where the ban on illegal photography is very common, it is difficult to avoid the frequent occurrence of such phenomena. Especially after many artists and idols flocked to this track, fans illegally photographed It’s even more popping up.
For example, during the 2022 tour of the musical "I'm Waiting for You at the End of Time" with the participation of popular idol Lin Yanjun, some fans frequently took secret photos while watching the performance, causing the staff to use laser pointers to remind them. However, although this approach prevented fans from filming to a certain extent, it also made other audiences present dissatisfied with being disturbed from watching the performance and believed that it was not timely to prevent the illegal filming.
Many idol fans fought wits and courage with the staff to protect their mobile phones and professional equipment for successful shooting, such as hiding SD cards in private parts to escape security inspections, tying brackets to thighs and other strange tricks that were difficult to guard against, and even caused disputes between fans and security personnel. .
At the concerts of idol groups such as Enhypen, Seenteen, Twice, etc., there have been cases where staff forcibly took away fans who were filming and took disciplinary measures such as deleting the video, confiscating the SD card, and being blocked by the brokerage company from purchasing tickets.
In recent years, with the enhancement of various types of copyright awareness and intellectual property protection in the Mainland, the public has become more and more concerned about protecting copyrights and opposing illegal photography. There has been an increase in spontaneous reports of illegal video removal, such as Xiaohongshu, Bilibili, Douyin and other platforms can report in the name of "infringement".
No matter what the viewing scene is, screen shots, candid shots, check-in attractions, performances, movies and other content that the public cannot let go must be "shared" on social media, which is also a kind of "sharing anxiety".
Should secret photography be banned at performances?
It is no exaggeration to say that prohibiting the illegal filming of live videos or pictures is like an endless game of moles.
In June last year, it was revealed that the beta version of the apple ios17 system had added a "give it a rest and enjoy the show" function that restricted users from shooting at the show. That is, after the user shoots at the show for a certain period of time, the system will perform intelligent Judgment to prevent further shooting.
This is not Apple's first attempt. Back in 2016, it applied for a patent on this topic, which is about a camera that can detect infrared signals and interpret the data, which can be used to disable video recording. This feature also caused fierce debate among users at the time. Many users insisted on refusing to introduce it and believed that it violated their right to independently control the shooting content.
However, for the vast majority of people immersed in Internet social media, cameras seem to have replaced the original sensory experience, and recording the performance is more important than immersing in enjoying the performance.
Brand Ridout, deputy chairman of the Cyberpsychology Research Group at the University of Sydney, pointed out that for many people, recording events has become a habit that is difficult to break. "This practice is not related to those who are simply experiencing rather than trying to capture the performance with a device." Comparatively, it may result in poorer memory.” In other words, when people try to freeze the performance into electronic devices, it actually affects the ability to remember the wonderful experience of the moment.
In order to allow the public to be more immersed in the live experience, many countries have also enacted flexible bans on the phenomenon of candid filming of performances, such as requiring audiences to hand over their mobile phones and equipment when entering the venue, or laying a large number of lasers to affect camera shooting, etc. , which is even a more common method at present.
For example, at this never-happened electronic music festival in Australia, in order to prohibit the audience from using their mobile phones to take pictures during the performance, the organizers will issue stickers asking the audience to stick their cameras. The organizers stated that only by preventing the audience from taking photos, recording or recording can they create an atmosphere that is more attractive to music fans and makes them want to watch.
In fact, many concerts, musicals, etc. have issued audience instructions with strong prohibition on filming clauses. In addition to allowing the audience to focus on watching the performance, it is also to protect the musicians from infringement. But even if the vast majority of fans of candid photography believe that the ban is overkill, relatively speaking, after purchasing the tickets, the audience has signed a tacit "contract" with the performers on known matters. If it includes prohibitions on filming and dissemination, they must abide by it by default.
This is because the rights of musicians, that is, performers, are protected by law. If recordings are made without the permission of the performers, it will infringe on neighboring rights and performers' rights, and cause damage to the sales of subsequent audio and video products after the performance.
If viewers record and disseminate these contents, they can be legally deleted through rights protection by the rights holders.
Once the public's stolen videos can reach the specifications for publication and distribution, it will threaten the interests of the performance costumes and will also face infringement prosecution. For example, in the United States, federal law stipulates civil penalties for unauthorized recording, broadcasting, and distribution of live performances. Even if the person who filmed the film has no commercial purpose, he still has to bear monetary compensation and turn over the filmed content.
In most overseas countries, although musicians are unlikely to sue fans who post stolen videos on the Internet, as performers, musicians have the legal right to prohibit audiences from recording and take certain measures. measure. For example, in 2015, Neko Case skipped the planned encore stage of the concert and ended the performance early after trying to no avail to persuade fans not to shoot singing videos.
From the perspective of a musician, stolen photography is also something that he is concerned about, resists, and even deeply disturbed by. For example, Adele previously discovered that a woman was secretly filming the entire concert and pointed out that "you can enjoy my music in reality, not through your camera"; Alicia Keys, Childish Gambino, etc. have publicly expressed their hope that Fans left their phones at home and stopped recording at the concert. Fat Joe even bluntly said that he was tired of music fans coming to a show but spending the whole time watching screen recordings. "If you go to a show and take out your camera to record, you are no longer in the moment, and you cannot enjoy the music experience of this moment."
In the final analysis, regardless of whether it is a public figure or an ordinary audience, regardless of social morality or commercial interests, the act of stealing is ultimately harmful to others and not self-interested.
Conclusion
It can be said that at a music performance, putting "recording video" first and foremost is putting social value above the live experience for music fans. This is not listening to music and enjoying it. music.
For example, the New York Philharmonic has put forward clear measures, "audiences can take photos before, after, and during the concert and during the intermission, but anyone who uses cameras, mobile phones, or other devices to take pictures during the performance will be forced to leave." Audiences have rights to view the show, but no license to share the intellectual property. And stolen photography not only affects one person, but also affects the immersive viewing pleasure of the audience and the overall atmosphere of the performers' performance.
Of course, it is unrealistic to truly "ban" theft filming at any performance at the moment. But letting go of the idea of stealing photos may also urge music fans to experience the charm of live performances more immersively, rather than just blocking their senses through another electronic eye.
Just as the film industry continues to promote civilized movie viewing and popularize legal education through the government and the private sector in order to avoid illegal filming, for the performance industry, the "Instructions for Viewing Performances" that have been ignored one after another may also need to be Legislative support has gradually ingrained the concept of prohibiting illegal photography in the hearts of the audience.
In the final analysis, criticizing illegal photography from the moral high ground is far less effective than a ticket.
