Concert Cell Phone Ban

[disykat]

She is 5 ft. tall so her head is a bit under everyone else's. She knows how to tell if the phone could possibly be blocking anyone. Everyone was standing anyway.How on earth can you disagree if you weren't there? You have no idea if the pone was in anyone's way.


There was no venue rule about cell phones.

I can disagree about a phone being in the way, because I know the space a cell phone takes up. When you are at a concert, people's heads are in the way, their hair is in the way, their ears are in the way, their hats are in the way, lots of things are in the way of your view of the stage. It's just a reality. A phone is no different. It adds one more thing that is in the way of the space behind you and that view of the stage, taking up space in the viewpoint of the stage from that perspective. How could it NOT be in the way?

If it wasn't against that venue's rules then she was within her rights and it really isn't even applicable to this conversation about venues where it isn't allowed and people are breaking the rules. However, it still took up visual space. That's a reality. It's certainly possible that everyone behind her was taller and no one was bothered by it, but that would've simply been luck on her part.

 

[sailorstitch]

I remember smuggling my 35mm camera into Nsync concerts. This is nothing new.

I did get to see Robin Williams live twice. He didn't allow photos or videos at all. He said it was distracting to him. At one of the shows I went to he caught a woman taking pictures and went off on her.

In Dec I saw 98 Degrees in concert. Now that's it's more acceptable than it was in the '90s, I love taking pictures at concerts. I don't normally use my phone. I prefer my digital camera with it's 15x zoom. I'm so use to taking it I didn't think anything of it for 98 Degrees. When I got to the show the police officer at the door nearly didn't let me in because of my camera. The band doesn't mind fans taking pictures/videos, but they don't want them to be "too professional". I was NOT informed of this policy when I bought my VIP package. If I had been, I would've left my camera at home. The officer asked me to go put the camera in my car. I don't have a car. I was dropped off at the show. My ride had left. The officer pulled me aside and the head of 98 Degrees's security came out to talk to me. We discussed leaving my camera with the coat check or box office, but nobody at the venue wanted to be responsible for it. He made me pinkie promise that I wouldn't use it. When a larger, hulking black man asks you to use your phone instead of your camera, you do it! Since he had the ability and the authority to pick me up and throw me out the door... I wasn't going to argue with him.

 

[ShadeDK]

The technology is new, but the problem/issue has been around a long time. Many years ago before cellphones when recording at any concert was forbidden, I recall some band called the Grateful Dead that not only allowed fans to tape their concerts, but actively encouraged it. That approach obviously destroyed their career and legacy since we've never heard of them. (yes - I'm being sarcastic - although the consequences of illegally recording concerts was forever burned in my brain during that very special two-part episode of "What's Happening" when Rerun got busted with the tape recorder under his trench coat at the Doobie Brothers concert).

I completely concede the rights of venues and artists to ban recording - and the copyright law that backs them up - but it strikes me as short-sighted. There is a benefit to artists that share music and recordings of the live experience (which is interesting since this move, in part, is purportedly using the same grounds for the ban - i.e., fan service). I can think of dozens of examples of live versions, otherwise unreleased material, and new material that's available from concert footage I can find online that keep me interested in an artist. And maybe will even get me to buy a ticket when they come to town - it's not like what's online replaces that experience.

 

[Imzadi]

Yup. Agreed. And that's what I do. If I take a call, I step out of the venue. However, if the venue or artist takes steps so that I can't use the phone for emergencies, I think that's crossing a line.

If the phones are stored in the pouches, you get to have your phone with you - in the pouch. So, conceivably, one would still be able to feel if the phone vibrates. Then you can go out, have it unlocked and respond to the call/text.

We might all be actually jumping to the wrong conclusion that Apple could/would totally disable the phones. According to the article the exact words are:

"Apple may also have a solution to the purported cellphone scourge. The tech giant patented a new technology two years ago that would disable iPhone cameras from recording or photographing live shows through the use of infrared signals beamed from the stage."​

So theoretically, just the camera would be disabled, not the whole phone.

However, if Android doesn't agree to do the same thing, considering the technology is patented and Apple notoriously does not like to share, then Android devices can still record the concerts.

The venues might have a better option of trying to figure out a way to flash laser beams, undetectable to the human eye, but cameras record them, and flash those beams across the stage. Kind of like in Ocean's Twelve, there is a scene in a museum where moving laser beams flashed all over the room. (Only we could see these. But, I've seen other movies where the lasers aren't visibly detectable. )

Maybe they could just widen the beams so what people record onstage is this:

Then people can keep their cameras, shoot all the videos they want of themselves dancing to the music, selfie pics of them & their friends in the audience. But, anything onstage gets blotted out.

 

[Albort]

If the phones are stored in the pouches, you get to have your phone with you - in the pouch. So, conceivably, one would still be able to feel if the phone vibrates. Then you can go out, have it unlocked and respond to the call/text.

We might all be actually jumping to the wrong conclusion that Apple could/would totally disable the phones. According to the article the exact words are:

"Apple may also have a solution to the purported cellphone scourge. The tech giant patented a new technology two years ago that would disable iPhone cameras from recording or photographing live shows through the use of infrared signals beamed from the stage."​

So theoretically, just the camera would be disabled, not the whole phone.

However, if Android doesn't agree to do the same thing, considering the technology is patented and Apple notoriously does not like to share, then Android devices can still record the concerts.

The venues might have a better option of trying to figure out a way to flash laser beams, undetectable to the human eye, but cameras record them, and flash those beams across the stage. Kind of like in Ocean's Twelve, there is a scene in a museum where moving laser beams flashed all over the room. (Only we could see these. But, I've seen other movies where the lasers aren't visibly detectable. )

Maybe they could just widen the beams so what people record onstage is this:

Then people can keep their cameras, shoot all the videos they want of themselves dancing to the music, selfie pics of them & their friends in the audience. But, anything onstage gets blotted out.

its treading on a lot of dangerous waters here... what prevents someone else outside of the concert from using it? For example, recording cops...
One thing about sending beams out like that is that people can claim it damages their camera. One example on this are when people use infrared lasers to blind security camera.
I know another things was that marriott tried doing something like that, ban cell service signals(use of Jammers) in order to promote their wifi but they got fined badly for that.

 

[Imzadi]

its treading on a lot of dangerous waters here... what prevents someone else outside of the concert from using it? For example, recording cops...
One thing about sending beams out like that is that people can claim it damages their camera. One example on this are when people use infrared lasers to blind security camera.
I know another things was that marriott tried doing something like that, ban cell service signals(use of Jammers) in order to promote their wifi but they got fined badly for that.

Good points.

 

[asta]

Taking photos of you and your friends is one thing, recording the performance is another. Unless you take 100s of photos the camera is not out and in the way for most of the concert. It is naive or maybe selfish to think that holding a cell phone up will not be in the line of view for those behind you at a concert. When I go to a concert I pay to see the act not to look around the glow of cellphones being held in the rows in front of me.

 

[msjprincess]

There is a vast difference between a Broadway show or an opera and a concert. The expectation is that you sit down and are quiet in the former and cell phones impede with that. Like a movie theater. A concert, OTOH, is loud and fun and you get up and dance and sing and have fun. I would want to take photos and snippets of videos to remember a concert. I'm not at all on board with this kind of ban.

I'm pretty sure there was a thread a few months ago where people said singing and dancing at a concert is rude. LOL

 

[dotfurio]

I don't mind other people taking photos or videos as long as they aren't holding their devices up in my line of sight. If performers want people to stop taking video I can respect that. I don't like phones being locked up, though. I want to be available to my kids, and if I knew I wouldn't be allowed to have access to my phone during the concert I wouldn't purchase a ticket.

Also, as far as the cases go, sounds like a huge pain in the butt to stop each person to put their phone in a case and later to go to a kiosk to unlock the case, especially for venues that hold thousands of people.

 

[Shanti]

But do people really go to actually SEE Beyonce or Jay-Z or do they go to SAY and post they were there?

It's the latter for many people, unfortunately.

 

[gotomu212]

I think the logistics of this are going to kill it. The hassle and time it takes to move people through the metal detectors is bad enough, but then to also stop them, lock their phone, and then to have to stop almost every person on the way out and unlock their phone?! You’ve been to concerts of 10-50k and know how there’s just a wave of people streaming out the exits. I can’t imagine this work at large events, small venues sure (but at a small venue you should be able to better police it anyway).

The sad thing is the cost of this and the staff to operate them, and all the lost pouches when people don’t bother to unlock them and just take them home to break open is going to raise ticket fees even more.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Even if that is the reason, how presumptuous of them to tell us we'd have a better time watching them instead of recording them

Curious why someone would think recording a concert is a better time than experiencing (watching) the concert?

He noticed her and had a ball posing and singing toward her phone.

Good to know what Adam Lambert likes/allows at his shows. The performer's wishes absolutely should be followed. Not everyone is Adam Lambert.

She is 5 ft. tall so her head is a bit under everyone else's

I'm 4'11" . I think bumbershoot is even shorter. Anyone's height would be considerate only when/if the recording device is held lower than their height and close to the face.

So you think a venue is going to keep track of 100 people (assuming a concert with over 10K people) and know i

Realistically, how many of those hundred would actually be contacted?

I do suspect that their definition of "emergency" might be different from the public at large though.

You mean, "Your patient is minutes away from giving birth" vs "Your kids want ice cream for dinner"?

yes - I'm being sarcastic

Facetious, maybe? Sarcasm not allowed here ;D

There is a benefit to artists that share music and recordings of the live experience

Yes, when it's the artist's decision or action. Concertgoers sharing artists' music and live recordings is detrimental to the artist.

 

[Imzadi]

Also, as far as the cases go, sounds like a huge pain in the butt to stop each person to put their phone in a case and later to go to a kiosk to unlock the case, especially for venues that hold thousands of people.

I think the logistics of this are going to kill it. The hassle and time it takes to move people through the metal detectors is bad enough, but then to also stop them, lock their phone, and then to have to stop almost every person on the way out and unlock their phone?!

It actually happens at the same time. They are already stopped at the metal detectors where they have to dump their cellphones into a bowl or bin to go through the detector. So no one can sneak a phone through. I saw the guards at Madison Square Garden have tubs of the green padded phone pouches, where the phones are placed right in and handed to the guests who were there to see a comedian.

Not sure what happens on the way out. We were there for a different concert which didn't require the phone pouches. But, I think they work like those plastic disks that are put on clothes in clothing stores to deter shoplifting. They are quickly slipped though a device which quickly unlocks the mechanism that locks the pouches. They probably had the device at all the exits.

 

[SteveMouse]

I can disagree about a phone being in the way, because I know the space a cell phone takes up. When you are at a concert, people's heads are in the way, their hair is in the way, their ears are in the way, their hats are in the way, lots of things are in the way of your view of the stage. It's just a reality. A phone is no different. It adds one more thing that is in the way of the space behind you and that view of the stage, taking up space in the viewpoint of the stage from that perspective. How could it NOT be in the way?

If it wasn't against that venue's rules then she was within her rights and it really isn't even applicable to this conversation about venues where it isn't allowed and people are breaking the rules. However, it still took up visual space. That's a reality. It's certainly possible that everyone behind her was taller and no one was bothered by it, but that would've simply been luck on her part.

There’s a very real potential that she was interfering with someone’s line of sight. Maybe several rows back.

And not everyone stands at concerts. Some of us can’t, and not all accessible seating is in the front row. I’m just as entitled to see the concert as anyone else who has a ticket.

 

[Sabeking]

The technology is new, but the problem/issue has been around a long time. Many years ago before cellphones when recording at any concert was forbidden, I recall some band called the Grateful Dead that not only allowed fans to tape their concerts, but actively encouraged it. That approach obviously destroyed their career and legacy since we've never heard of them. (yes - I'm being sarcastic - although the consequences of illegally recording concerts was forever burned in my brain during that very special two-part episode of "What's Happening" when Rerun got busted with the tape recorder under his trench coat at the Doobie Brothers concert).

I completely concede the rights of venues and artists to ban recording - and the copyright law that backs them up - but it strikes me as short-sighted. There is a benefit to artists that share music and recordings of the live experience (which is interesting since this move, in part, is purportedly using the same grounds for the ban - i.e., fan service). I can think of dozens of examples of live versions, otherwise unreleased material, and new material that's available from concert footage I can find online that keep me interested in an artist. And maybe will even get me to buy a ticket when they come to town - it's not like what's online replaces that experience.

I rushed home to see part 2! That was serious business! How about when Jerry Seinfeld got hooked on filming movies in the theatre and got picky about the lighting and working conditions?

 

[PollyannaMom]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...eaves-students-to-their-own-unusable-devices/

^ This article is mostly about using the pouches in a school, but it explains a little about the unlocking system:

"These spaces issue each concertgoer a Yondr stretchable neoprene case that locks the phone in with a magnetic seal. The case can be opened only if a venue employee activates a special device that emits wireless signal to the lock."

That sounds to me like maybe you would only need to get close to the signal, so it might work with a moving line??

I'm still not on board with it, though. I wish people would just follow the rules in the first place!

 

[luvsJack]

I can disagree about a phone being in the way, because I know the space a cell phone takes up. When you are at a concert, people's heads are in the way, their hair is in the way, their ears are in the way, their hats are in the way, lots of things are in the way of your view of the stage. It's just a reality. A phone is no different. It adds one more thing that is in the way of the space behind you and that view of the stage, taking up space in the viewpoint of the stage from that perspective. How could it NOT be in the way?

If it wasn't against that venue's rules then she was within her rights and it really isn't even applicable to this conversation about venues where it isn't allowed and people are breaking the rules. However, it still took up visual space. That's a reality. It's certainly possible that everyone behind her was taller and no one was bothered by it, but that would've simply been luck on her part.

Actually the thread started out talking about artists objecting to the videoing with cell phones. Apparently the artist we were seeing didn’t have an issue with it. The article itself mentioned Beyoncé for instance.

Everyone there was taller than her which is why we made sure to get as close as we did. It is entirely possible to video stuff without blocking anyone’s view and that was what she did. It’s also possible to video with your phone without watching whatever it is through the phone.

This particular venue is almost completely standing only. The only seats are above the stage so they would be looking down on the standing crowd and the artist. No way anything happening in the floor was blocking their view.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

It isn't so much that they want people to watch them instead of texting. One can still do whatever they want during a concert or show. They don't want people RECORDING them and then posting the shows on social media so others can see their shows for FREE.

At Broadway theatres, they always make an announcement and have put it in the Playbill that one cannot record the shows or take any pictures of the performance. It's against the copyright laws. You want a memorable picture of the performance, you buy a program. The ushers all keep an eagle eye out to make sure no one is snapping pics or videos. Luckily, most people comply.

Musicians & comedians have the same rights to protect their work. I think Dave Chappelle was the first to do this with the phone bags. Now, other musicians & comedians are following suit on what Broadway shows have always done. You don't like their rules, you (general you) don't have to see their show.

I didn't say that Broadway shows lock up phones or use technology to disable them. I was responding to another poster who thought the performers were doing it so people would only watch them. I was talking about the reason the musicians/performers/comedians want phones not used to shoot videos or pics. It is their legal right.

But, we live in an era of entitlement. Where people, like your friend, feel that if they WANT to shoot pics/video, then they are going to. That the laws/rules/wishes of the performers/venue don't matter in their case. There are just too many people at other events for the ushers to be taking so many phones away. AND they wouldn't be locked away as securely as in the green pouches.

And what's the difference between an usher taking a person's phone away once he is caught taking photos/video? He STILL won't be able to use his phone at all once he's handed over his phone. IF he does need to use his phone so badly, he can get up, retrieve his phone, walk out of the venue & use his phone. Hand the phone back over to the usher and sit & watch the show again.

Same for the green pouches. If a doctor on call needs to check in, or parent with a sickly baby at home wants to call, they can have the pouch unlocked, use the phone outside of the venue, lock up the phone again and re-enter the venue. Cell phones have only been around for a few decades, Previously, doctors & parents had to leave the venue & look for a payphone, instead of getting their own phone back & unlocked. If the situation is so urgent that they can't be away from a phone for a couple hours, then they probably shouldn't be there in the first place. Same as before cellphones were invented.

__________________
When we went to Vegas in October we saw KA. They have people with laser points to reflect when an usher should talk to the person regarding cell phone usage. There was a guy right in front of us that was starting to record. Laser point dot went right to the back of his head almost immediately and an usher promptly told him no videoing. The guy wasn't there for the theater-wide announcement but still. Either way the usher didn't take his cell phone but I'm sure the usher would have just removed him from the theater if he had continued. The guy, by the way, didn't break out his phone at any other point in the show.

That being said no I wouldn't support my phone being locked up. It's not even that's I'm expecting a call or anything. It's my personal property though and while I wouldn't disobey the rules I wouldn't support an entity or artist who was forcing me to lock up my phone because they didn't want the mere chance that someone would use it to video tape nor would I support my cell phone provider or manufacturer promptly disabling my cell phone either.

It is much easier to patrol theaters like Broadway, etc plus the ambience is different usually at Broadway, etc than other types of concerts but actual concerts with thousands and thousands of guests it's not. But the answer should not be to force patrons to lock up their phones or to have them disabled. Put it on your ticket that you don't want video taping (as that appears to be the largest issue) if that's your problem and then kick out the people you see doing that as you see them. You won't get all the people with larger venues but you will get some. That's far more understanding than lock up your phone or disable your phone. It also doesn't appear to be just a video taping/copyright issue but almost hurt feelings issue where the artist wants people to pay attention to them.

Not all artists have an issue with cell phones either.

I think it's the sheer number of people doing it now that is also a problem. Before, it was a handful of them, scattered throughout the auditorium. (I've never seen Adele perform, even on TV, so I can't use her as my example.) But, say, if Alicia Keys, who writes her own songs, plays the piano and sings, looks up from the piano, and instead of seeing a crowd of faces looking directly at her, whom she can connect to, see their reactions & responses, instead sees a bunch of cellphone cameras held in front of their faces or in front of the people's faces in the row behind, she'd have a different reaction and connection to that audience.




This makes my point. Is one there to be a videographer of the event, to see it again later, or actually experience the event live, participating in person, in the present, being fully present, not one eye and attention on a cellphone camera? Why go just to film a performer? There is plenty of video footage of that performer performing - and usually shot better.

To the second paragraph..why do people go to events and get completely drunk or high or spend zero time actually watching the event they are attending and by events I do also mean concerts? Cell phones aren't the only thing pulling attention away from the artists but it's an easy thing nowadays to point to because cell phones are used all the time.

 

[luvsJack]

Curious why someone would think recording a concert is a better time than experiencing (watching) the concert?

Good to know what Adam Lambert likes/allows at his shows. The performer's wishes absolutely should be followed. Not everyone is Adam Lambert.


I'm 4'11" . I think bumbershoot is even shorter. Anyone's height would be considerate only when/if the recording device is held lower than their height and close to the face.

Realistically, how many of those hundred would actually be contacted?

You mean, "Your patient is minutes away from giving birth" vs "Your kids want ice cream for dinner"?

Facetious, maybe? Sarcasm not allowed here ;D

Yes, when it's the artist's decision or action. Concertgoers sharing artists' music and live recordings is detrimental to the artist.

Well the fact of her height is that anyone behind her was looking over her and the phone. She wasn’t holding it up high.

And I never said an artist’s wishes should t be followed. Never actually had one say anything about it. And can’t imagine in some venues them even being able to see someone videoing. Of course not everyone is Adam Lambert. Not everyone is Beyoncé either or Adele. Point is they don’t all have an issue with it. Many very successful, very profitable artists are fine with it.

 

[Skywalker]

These performers get paid to perform for me, I don't get paid to watch them. If I am in the audience and I choose to "watch through my phone" that is my choice. If I choose to sit there texting or whatever, that is my choice. You don't want too, that is your choice.
These performers are so self absorbed that they ban something that distracts paying fans from watching them. Note I didn't say they are being distracted, they just have a problem with people not watching them.
And using tech to disable someone's phone? Really you would want them to go there? SMDH.

Well, I think the self-absorbed ones are those that feel they are so important they can't go without cell phone access for 2 hours. Follow the rules, or stay home...it's not complicated. Do people keep the their phones on and text during movies too? Or live theatre? In case there is an emergency that needs them? lol.