MD10PLT

Since you have apparently never read it, I will quote the source.


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

Zapata

Oh, I have defintely read it.

Very good cut and paste job! Now, answer my question......more specific this time, please.

Fr8doggie

Is a camcorder specifically referenced in the list as approved?

DYNASTY HVY

ok now that we are all back on track ,has anyone ever had a problem with a camcorder affecting the operation of an aircraft?
Appears as if the stewardess over reacted on this one.



ok gin and tonic time !

Waldo11

Wow he got Constitutional on you!

⌐ AV8OR WANNABE

CactusCrew

While this discussion of rights is interesting, and I agree that that crew most likely overstepped their bounds. It got me to thinking about how would we apply our "rights" in other situations ...

Do you have the right to operate a camcorder in a movie theater ?

Or maybe an audio recorder at a concert ?

Or even more to the point ...

Do you have the right to post your video of me on UTube without my knowledge and consent ?

Not Exactly ... and I am sure it gets done all of the time.

Back to the constitutional rants and raves.

__________________
.

cbire880

You are permitted to operate those devices unless specifically restricted by the copyright holder. Remember, admittance to a concert or theater is contengent on accepting an agreement with the operator of the venue. You are not in a public place at that point and may be restricted within reasonable means. If you videotape a movie, you are infringing on the intellectual property rights of the production company. Its the same concept as the federal warning at the beginning of a video tape (DVD).

With respect to YouTube, I believe if you review their terms of service, you are not permitted to post anything identifying without that person's permission. You would be able to petition YouTube to have it removed. Of course, if you wanted to pursue the poster, you'd have an issue of proving where the line in "permission" is drawn.

I find nothing in the JetBlue Contract of Carriage that prohibits you from videotaping during flight operations. Of course, if you are suspected of videotaping airport and flight operations for a more sinister purpose, you may be asked to justify yourself to the authorities. There is nothing illegal about filming in an airport or on an airplane though.

I'd say they were trying to conduct damage control and overstepped their authority in trying to suppress potentially bad media.

Radials Rule

It was pretty bad that they tried to tack on other charges...shots of the cockpit?

__________________
Radial engines = proof of order to the universe.

MD10PLT

The reason I threw in the constitution (and I was trying to keep the thread on track) is; somehow the TSA and FAA has developed this notion that you forfit all rights as a US citizen when you step into an airport or onto an airplane. The bottom line is you don't. You are just entering into a contract with a company to deliver a service. In accepting that contract you are agreeing to follow the rules they require.

The problem comes when the company tries to enforce those rules. The person in authority must act within the law and any rules governing his actions. When he steps over the line, he has to be held accountable.

Much like when you drive a car, you agree to follow the rules and if stopped the person in authority is expected to follow the rules and the law. Once again if he doesn't he should be held accountable. like the airline example you do not forfeit your rights just because you drive a car and get stopped.

In the Jet Blue case it sounds like the crew, the TSA and the Feds may have stepped over the line. If so; they should pay.