^^^^agreed
It ain't that simple.
there have been videos flagged and video Grapher sued because either the person was NOT KNOWINGLY being taped or the person was under age etc.
Even reality shows have to blur out faces in public places before they air. My point being responsibility and ownership is still at play.
I can go deeper.
Once at a children party the place taped it for advertising but one of mother was in a abusive relationship and was under a new identity. They never asked permission. They released the promo vid and the abuser located her. Woo boy... trust me EVERYONE got sued. The owner couldn't just point the finger at the video guy. Video guy immediately blamed the owner but that ain't work either.
So I'm not saying they WRONG.
But it ain't THAT simple especially in a "public" venue or public person.
It all depends on the specifics and what kind of lawyer the OTHER SIDE has too.
Choke going in the club recording Jay Z means he OWNS that outright and can profit from it?
So I can record a movie on my phone? Or a Taylor Swift concert? Or a Broadway show?
This isn't on the street.
It's IN the venue.
Choke was working for the Tunnel? Roc a fella? Okay MAYBE.... probably. Because
@keone is right it's just like the Cam pink fur picture.
But then I don't want to hear Dame is some business genius no more. Cause that is just dumb.
PAPERWORK>>>>>
I OWN my wedding pictures videos and the negatives I asked for and paid for all that and this was decades ago.
Whats Dame excuse?