Walking tours now on Roosevelt stay away if you’re married or have a girlfriend.

[EbandFlow]

I guess I stand corrected. The NY Post posted an article yesterday on the guy's TikTok video of Doll House. So I guess the NY Post is monitoring his TikTok now.

https://nypost.com/2023/11/04/metro/busy-alleged-brothel-in-corona-queens-advertised-on-tiktok/

 

[Mamluke13]

I guess I stand corrected. The NY Post posted an article yesterday on the guy's TikTok video of Doll House. So I guess the NY Post is monitoring his TikTok now.

https://nypost.com/2023/11/04/metro/busy-alleged-brothel-in-corona-queens-advertised-on-tiktok/

Got damn thank goodness i don't go there no more

 

[Ankle_Socks]

There def is a resemblance.

Guy on the left is african , South African to be exact, former soldier, now an armoured car driver
The clip with him and his colleague is from an attempted heist.

 

[EbandFlow]

Got damn thank goodness i don't go there no more

If you watch his other videos, he is actually filming himself negotiating price and going inside to all these places. He is on a crusade to get them shut down.

 

[danny127]

If you watch his other videos, he is actually filming himself negotiating price and going inside to all these places. He is on a crusade to get them shut down.

Filming or taping conversations in a private area without their permission or consent is a felony in some jurisdictions
and it is inadmissible in court. So this vigilante isn't as smart as he thinks he is. He is breaking the law

 

[jpkeller]

Filming or taping conversations in a private area without their permission or consent is a felony in some jurisdictions
and it is inadmissible in court. So this vigilante isn't as smart as he thinks he is. He is breaking the law

New York is a “one-party consent” state, which means that you can record conversations if you are physically in the state and are taking part in the conversation, or if you have permission from one of the parties in the conversation.

If you are the person taping a conversation with someone else, it is obvious that you agree to the recording, hence it is legal.
Recording a call you are not participating in is generally illegal.

If you are just filming, then when you are lawfully present in any public space, you have the right to document, including to photograph or record, anything in plain view, including government buildings and the police. On private property, the owner may set rules about photography or video. Once you are off the street, you can be considered in a private place.

 

[ChicaCribin90s]

New York is a “one-party consent” state, which means that you can record conversations if you are physically in the state and are taking part in the conversation, or if you have permission from one of the parties in the conversation.

If you are the person taping a conversation with someone else, it is obvious that you agree to the recording, hence it is legal.
Recording a call you are not participating in is generally illegal.

If you are just filming, then when you are lawfully present in any public space, you have the right to document, including to photograph or record, anything in plain view, including government buildings and the police. On private property, the owner may set rules about photography or video. Once you are off the street, you can be considered in a private place.

Agreed..........and that said, his only issue is the concealment of the camera, cause if he stated that it was in plain sight and no one objected to him filming (On private property), then he'd be in the clear. In the street, you can object all you want. There is no expectation of privacy there.

 

[krideynyc]

Agreed..........and that said, his only issue is the concealment of the camera, cause if he stated that it was in plain sight and no one objected to him filming (On private property), then he'd be in the clear. In the street, you can object all you want. There is no expectation of privacy there.

Not exactly. On Private Property, he still needs explicit permission first, in order to record. Doesn't matter if he walks in announcing he is recording with the camera in plain sight, and no one objects. The expectation is privacy first.

 

[ChicaCribin90s]

Not exactly. On Private Property, he still needs explicit permission first, in order to record. Doesn't matter if he walks in announcing he is recording with the camera in plain sight, and no one objects. The expectation is privacy first.

Agreed, but I don't think it would constitute a criminal offense unless the person trespasses you and you refuse to leave. Think about it like those stores that have no firearms allowed signs. Their rule doesn't carry the weight of the law. If they see or know you have a gun and ask you to leave, so long as you comply, there's not much they can do. I think the same applies here. As long as he claims that he walked in with the camera in plain sight (And who could or would prove otherwise?), I think he's clear of charges.

 

[ChicaCribin90s]

Not exactly. On Private Property, he still needs explicit permission first, in order to record. Doesn't matter if he walks in announcing he is recording with the camera in plain sight, and no one objects. The expectation is privacy first.

It's an odd topic because although we could say that privacy is an expectation, what privacy would you have or could expect at a friend's home where he/she is allowing people to film or photograph a party? I think a direct order to stop filming or leave the premises has to be stated by the actual property owner or person who resides in order to establish something that can be charged as a crime.

 

[krideynyc]

Agreed, but I don't think it would constitute a criminal offense unless the person trespasses you and you refuse to leave. Think about it like those stores that have no firearms allowed signs. Their rule doesn't carry the weight of the law. If they see or know you have a gun and ask you to leave, so long as you comply, there's not much they can do. I think the same applies here. As long as he claims that he walked in with the camera in plain sight (And who could or would prove otherwise?), I think he's clear of charges.

He isn't. For two reasons. 1) The whole "no one objects" argument is flawed. Under NY State legal standards, silence does not equate to consent. So even if no one objects, they also did not give him permission to film. 2) Pertains to the case of the filming inside the spa: while the One-Party rule is fine for audio, video has way more restrictions. With video, if you distribute or broadcast anyone's likeness, you need a signed Release Form. A verbal consent is not enough. So being able to see the faces of those providers, unless he has signed Release Forms, he is in violation of the law. But you are correct regarding "House Rules". They don't have legal bearing, except for the owner to legally ask you to leave the premises or risk trespassing.

It's an odd topic because although we could say that privacy is an expectation, what privacy would you have or could expect at a friend's home where he/she is allowing people to film or photograph a party? I think a direct order to stop filming or leave the premises has to be stated by the actual property owner or person who resides in order to establish something that can be charged as a crime.

Slightly different situations. A party would be a social gathering. There's fewer expectations of privacy when compared to a spa running a business. However, even at a social event, you retain the right to privacy by asking people not to take your picture or film you.

 

[Mamluke13]

http://www.usasexguide.nl/forum/showthread.php?33810-D-h
Read dh is permanently closed. Wonder if anyone got arrested

 

[ChicaCribin90s]

http://www.usasexguide.nl/forum/showthread.php?33810-D-h
Read dh is permanently closed. Wonder if anyone got arrested

Damnnn! I'm pretty sure they'll find another spot sooner than later. I never went back after they gave me a hard time at the door over that phone text thing they do, but I will say, I saw some nice lineups there on the times that I went.

 

[Muley242]

Any action in the morning

 

[Mamluke13]

http://www.usasexguide.nl/forum/showthread.php?3882-Escort-Reports
They said dh is open. They must be paying some people off

 

[User826]

Filming or taping conversations in a private area without their permission or consent is a felony in some jurisdictions
and it is inadmissible in court. So this vigilante isn't as smart as he thinks he is. He is breaking the law

Doing it to bring awareness to the local community and media which will in turn force the hands of authorities. The problem with fast houses is that they're literally next to a civilians home where they may or may not have children. Like drug dealing, you bring that kind of business around families, you should get shut down.

 

[Talo]

I hate the Karens and civilians that try to vilify this hobby and everyone associated with it. What's worse is this new breed of bottom feeders trying to record things for social media like tiktok. They dont even make money off of tiktok views. So when I see stupid shit like this coming from people within the community or from the bottom feeders it just makes me furious. This hobby has had its ups and downs and at this point I only see things going down hill the way things are. Then you have everyone flaunting it in public or shooting stupid sound bites like that one lady at dool house. They deserve what's coming but at the same time it just means bad shit for everyone.

 

[TIskier]

I hate the Karens and civilians that try to vilify this hobby and everyone associated with it. What's worse is this new breed of bottom feeders trying to record things for social media like tiktok. They dont even make money off of tiktok views. So when I see stupid shit like this coming from people within the community or from the bottom feeders it just makes me furious. This hobby has had its ups and downs and at this point I only see things going down hill the way things are. Then you have everyone flaunting it in public or shooting stupid sound bites like that one lady at dool house. They deserve what's coming but at the same time it just means bad shit for everyone.

They don’t make money from TIKTOK? I just assumed the clicks were monetized. Damn, they really suck.

 

[ChicaCribin90s]

They don’t make money from TIKTOK? I just assumed the clicks were monetized. Damn, they really suck.

As far as I know, you can make money per views on tik tok, but it's very little compared to what you would make on youtube.

 

[Talo]

As far as I know, you can make money per views on tik tok, but it's very little compared to what you would make on youtube.

There is a minimum number of subscribers (10k and up) and frequency requirements, not just one mark must be met its multiple. I highly doubt these particular content creators are above all the required marks. those users above those marks.

Youtube creators always complain about having to explain to Gen Z why they don't post on TikTok and this is basicly what it all boils down to. No money it it for them.