An interesting conversation here about the use of cameras at athletic events, triggered by my brief clip of a Tyler Hansbrough dunk. The Smith Center forbids video cams (policy is printed on tix, too), but allows still photos. My little Nikon takes stills AND short videos, as do most devices produced in recent years -- I took it to the game thinking I'd snap a couple of pics, found the video worked well from my seat, and...

What to do? Ban all cameras? Allow cameras, but ask people not to take/post video? This issue is going to come up again and again in venues far beyond college athletics.

Brian has a suggestion: "They should encourage fan videos and pics then give them a place to share it...If UNC and the ACC can't understand this now they'll have some hard lessons to learn about new media in the near future. The number of these small video cameras will only increase plus younger fans will EXPECT to be able to use them. Banning them would create bad publicity, FAST."

Comments

[Lenslinger]

Intriguing. How long will it take venues to update their policies regarding new recording devices in the Information Renaissance? How will it affect the marketing of venue-specific imagery when every patron packs high-powered digital lenses on the most ancillary of objects? Once an image, sound or sequence is cast upon the internets, no amount of copyright lawyers can stuff the genie back in the bottle. One thing's for sure: no matter how we rewrite the rulebooks of image-gathering, it won't stop some teenager with a badge and flashlight from hasslin' me and my camera at the gate. Save me an aisle seat...

[John Robinson]

I think you're on to something worth a deeper look, Ed. Brian's right, too. Colleges zealously guard their images, logos and athletic marketing. TV broadcasters pay schools big money for sole rights to televise the events. It's not in the best financial interest of either to let any schmoe with a video camera shoot whatever he or she feels like and stream it online. (Not without them getting a cut of the action, at least.) This is another case of institutional policy and the law lagging behind technology and the consumer. And we've seen what's happened when the record companies decided to fight it.

[Ed Cone]

All kinds of issues in play here...I have no problem with a rule against commercial use of video clips, or clips of a certain length. But is my use of a brief clip at a site that accepts ads 'commercial use'? I think not. What if I aggregated clips from a bunch of users, and sold ads around them? Probably so...

[John Robinson]

Makes sense to me. But think about the history of large corporations and other institutions about protecting their products and names. Here's a recent example:

http://wfmynews2.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=53882

There's some precedent for lawyers representing the interests of the school or Fox Sports South from deciding that they have to stamp out ANY threat.

[Brian R.]

I think it's important to point out that Ed's video or others like it aren't a replacement for real TV coverage. Nor are they ANY real financial threat. I love watching college basketball and wouldn't watch little vids instead of a higher rez version. These small vids are viral advertisements. A type of social activity that basketball fans, young and old, can enjoy. When you give a community (ie ACC basketball fans) a common activity that layers on top of another (ie following the tar heels) you have a very strong synergy. Creativity + fans x love = money.