champdisney
Well-Known Member
He did break character. Don’t be fooled by the ‘performance’. The only thing this Gaston did was sprinkle some pixie dust over his reprimand.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Is anyone in the wrong here?
- Thread starter mergatroid
- Start date
Model3 McQueen
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
If you're out in public, you shouldn't have any expectation of privacy. You can film cops in public, you can film me itching my rear end on the sidewalk, and if Disney permits cameras / filming in their parks - you can film as well.
As an example for a place where you can have reasonable expectation of privacy, don't film in the restroom or changing room.
For those of you interested, here's a quick read that might shed some light on this scenario https://www.findlaw.com/injury/tort...the--reasonable-expectation-of-privacy--.html
Now bear in mind vloggers - they film parkgoers CONSTANTLY whilst doing there own thing. Is this wrong? Would the Gaston actor disapprove?
As an example for a place where you can have reasonable expectation of privacy, don't film in the restroom or changing room.
For those of you interested, here's a quick read that might shed some light on this scenario https://www.findlaw.com/injury/tort...the--reasonable-expectation-of-privacy--.html
Now bear in mind vloggers - they film parkgoers CONSTANTLY whilst doing there own thing. Is this wrong? Would the Gaston actor disapprove?
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
I will be the last to know what Disney company policy is but there are two different possible policies involved in this situation.
First is would it be wrong to be filming a character interaction? Are there specific rules governing what one publicly can photograph in a hugely commercial venue? That I don't know, but that leads to the second thing.
Would it be the place of a face character enforce the company rules, whatever they might be? Wouldn't that be the job of the handler and not the character? So whatever the lady might have been doing, if against the rules, is no where near as offensive as that character breaking character in an entertainment situation to become robo-cop.
Out of place and out of character. Embarrassing a guest without the authority to do so. Disney will give away $30 dollar T-shirts to help an overexposed guest to avoid public embarrassment, but the lady with the camera must be taught a lesson. Both may be wrong, but the degree of aggression on the part of Gaston far and away exceeds the lady, in my opinion.
Last edited:
Pepper's Ghost
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I have to comment on this one too. Again, intimidating a guest is most definitely NOT company policy. If it is, I believe I'll be starting a class-action lawsuit immediately. A company policy stating that employees should intimidate and embarrass guests should result in a multi-billion dollar settlement deal. Not that I want money for such a thing, but a company with abhorrent policies should be punished, even if it just forces them to pay up so we can donate the full amount to charity.
If it's company policy that cast members should stop guests from video taping any interactions while on property, then it's appropriate for the cast member to politely ask the guest to step aside into a more secluded area and explain the policy which the person might not be aware of. It is not appropriate to intimidate and embarrass a person who spent at least a couple hundred dollars to enjoy a day on property, and was doing nothing malicious or dangerous to the well being of other guests.
The Colonel
Well-Known Member
At least Gaston didn't spit at her. He's especially good at expectorating.
jloucks
Well-Known Member
This topic comes up from year to year and my opinion remains the same. You are allowed to videotape in public where there is no expectation of privacy.
Expectation of privacy plummets where there is an active public spectacle taking place. ...like Gaston carrying on about whatever.
Kids are no exception.
Thaaaaat being said, there is a line, not all that blurry, where is may be legal but it is also creepy. Videotaping kids in scenarios that are not supposed to be a spectacle and refusing to stop when asked by the parents are grounds for escalation. You want to videotape my little kids at the waterpark and refuse to stop when asked, I am going to be sued in small claims court for camera damage.
But, you want to tape my kids at a meet and great because, let's face it, my kids are awesome, that's fine. ...but don't start following us around the park.
A slightly different topic is what you can do with the footage. You cannot use it for profit without permission of the folks in the video if the the folks are the focus of the shot, and I think there are special rules around kids and posting of any kind. Kid privacy laws are different from those of adults. Group shots of folks can be used for profit without permission, so long at nobody is the focus of the shot without permission.
You absolutely could request a YouTube channel that is monetizing a meet and greet of your kids to take the footage down, and they would be forced to comply.
Expectation of privacy plummets where there is an active public spectacle taking place. ...like Gaston carrying on about whatever.
Kids are no exception.
Thaaaaat being said, there is a line, not all that blurry, where is may be legal but it is also creepy. Videotaping kids in scenarios that are not supposed to be a spectacle and refusing to stop when asked by the parents are grounds for escalation. You want to videotape my little kids at the waterpark and refuse to stop when asked, I am going to be sued in small claims court for camera damage.
But, you want to tape my kids at a meet and great because, let's face it, my kids are awesome, that's fine. ...but don't start following us around the park.
A slightly different topic is what you can do with the footage. You cannot use it for profit without permission of the folks in the video if the the folks are the focus of the shot, and I think there are special rules around kids and posting of any kind. Kid privacy laws are different from those of adults. Group shots of folks can be used for profit without permission, so long at nobody is the focus of the shot without permission.
You absolutely could request a YouTube channel that is monetizing a meet and greet of your kids to take the footage down, and they would be forced to comply.
This channel has almost 100 videos of Gaston meeting strangers and yet nobody appears bothered by the filming. I'm not sure if the owner makes money from it or not though?
Incomudro
Well-Known Member
Yes, that's why there's a level of grey area here.
Things like this can be a matter of duration, location, etc.
That's why it's not creepy for people back in the crowd to record some of the Jedi Academy.
Probably no one would have a problem with people/parents on line for Gaston's meet and greet to pull their phones out and record some of his interactions before their turn.
Or, for passersby who might happen upon him to record part of what they see.
But, set up a tripod off to the side and record entire interactions - well... That's a different story.
jloucks
Well-Known Member
Yea, first folks have to find their likeness and then figure out if they are monetized videos. I bet these are tho, and youtube makes it really easy to have a video taken down.
...and it is possible the folks gave consent. I have seen many techniques, from asking on the same clip "Hey, is it ok if I used this for my business" to having an assistant chase them down with some flattery and a little card.
Youtube just suggested I watch this. A female gropes Gaston and is told to leave by him in no uncertain terms, quite rightly imho.
Married5Times
Well-Known Member
But Gaston touched her also in retaliation????!!!! And his touch was longer in duration. And he touched twice with his directional light push in the back
It's not about touching, rather touching inappropriately I feel. To touch his breast area the way she did was 'suggestive' to say the least and the reason he told her to leave and mentioned 'children'. Characters are touched and touch back as part of their interactions all the time, however there's overstepping the mark and making it more sexual where they draw the line.
Exactly. If a male touched a female character in the same body area people would be in an uproar. The chest is considered a "no-touch" area. The back is generally OK, and anything below the waistline is out of bounds unless consent is given.
Pepper's Ghost
Well-Known Member
Boy, Gaston has a rough time fighting off his adorers. First video taken that he didn't like, and now he's getting felt up. I think it's the same "actor" too (using that term loosely). Rough life fighting off female adorers. 
I realize it's inappropriate. This guy seems to reveal a bit jerkiness when he breaks character. I think there's a better way of handling it. He must be so sick of being viewed as a handsome piece of meat.
I realize it's inappropriate. This guy seems to reveal a bit jerkiness when he breaks character. I think there's a better way of handling it. He must be so sick of being viewed as a handsome piece of meat.
Whippet Mom
Active Member
Does anybody know what the Disney protocol is for these characters when it comes to people inaproperly touching them?
NickMaio
Well-Known Member
It adds unnecessary stress to his working environment.Boy, Gaston has a rough time fighting off his adorers. First video taken that he didn't like, and now he's getting felt up. I think it's the same "actor" too (using that term loosely). Rough life fighting off female adorers.
A grown adult should really know better.
It's DL not some skeezy hookup bar.
JusticeDisney
Well-Known Member
This.
MickeyLuv'r
Well-Known Member
I have 100% been intimidated by Star Wars Characters at WDW. Come to think of it, multiple times.
I don't recall the exact wording, but Darth Vader said something we found somewhat shocking at the time.
In the early days of GE, the darker characters were allowed to be their character.
The Stepsisters at 1900Park Fare were also allowed to actually be their characters too and say some pretty surprising things to both adults and children.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I don’t believe a “privacy” claim could ever be argued as a term or condition of a ticket
Pepper's Ghost
Well-Known Member
I agree, honestly. Just making light of the situation. The girl seemed to be playful more than harassing, but I understand his reaction. I guess his reaction even if it was grumpy was better than if he had been sleazy in response by grabbing her back. His response probably was the best reaction he could have in that situation.
Last edited: