People have forgotten that the land belongs to the people. Not the Government. The government is supposed to manage it on behalf of the people. The problem is they now think it belongs to them. And we have allowed it.
Man, I've been hearing a lot about this lately. It is utterly outrageous that the gov is trying to restrict lawful citizens from being able to capture their experiences in nature--which is supposed to be for EVERYONE. This is government overreach at its worst. Reaching out to my officials.
We all have to speak up. But even that probably won't make a difference. It's just wrong. There should be some level of common sense applied, but we all know our government is incapable of that.
@@SpiguyverBackpacking1 People outside of the youtuber world have no idea this is a problem. Rep. Latta of Ohio tried to change this in 2017 but the bill died in committee. Which means the rest of the committee members didn't have any idea it was important and just ignored the bill. But the bill to fix this is already written, it just needs attention.
Lmao, no it's not what u think it is. It's a pre existing law by Republicans waaaayyyyy back when. Anyhow, it's designed for big companies. But since this law is ancient . It hasn't been updated to small ppl, Not companies. This RU-vidr is just misinformed.
@@shadowofintent7209 Correct that it is a pre-existing law that didn’t used to apply to people on RU-vid. However the issue is that they’re starting to apply it to people just making videos on RU-vid. He does mention this in the video
Unreal. Just more control out of a growing government. Sad part is 'most' people making content on YT, for example, are doing it for recreation and hobby. Yet there are tons of "influencers" on every social media platform raking in money for posting their pics/videos at this overlook and that waterfall in national parks for the sole purpose of making $. Thank you for bringing attention to it.
Right, I can certainly speak for the vast majority of backpacking RU-vidrs, there's not many making real money. I lose money on the gear and equipment I buy each year vs what minimal revenue comes in. Literally one National Park trip permit fee would wipe out a year of revenue from my channel!
We have become the country that we fought against in 1780. Except now it’s even much worse. Scary where we’ll be in 20+ more years, but I try not to think about it. Been enjoying your overnight vids- keep up the great work!
All of the serious, violent crime we have in this country, and THIS is what the government is concerned with? Completely nuts. Not to mention that the parks benefit tremendously from all of the free advertising that YT creators have given them. Think how many people decide to visit a national park just because they learned about it from some hiker with a gopro.
We do state park tours and reviews on our rv channel. We are in a National Forest now but we aren't monetized. Do these regulations apply to the smaller channels? What about the AT thru hikers passing through sharing their journey? Absolute overreach. I wonder if the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) can fight this. So many people who who can't get out and see these sights thrive on sharing in the journey with others who are able to.
It applies to anyone who is making money off of the content they create. I mentioned the AT in the video, but another person brought up the fact that the entirety of the AT is a National Scenic Trail, so does it all fall within the purview of the NPS? I don't know. I'm hoping that this is just another rule/law that's on the books that no one pays attention to. I do not plan to change what I'm doing, I'll let you know if that changes!
RU-vid itself makes a lot of money off of this content. It would be appropriate for them to work out a licensing deal/ revenue sharing partnership with government. It would also give them a competitive advantage over other video hosting sites.
Coming from a business standpoint if the government isn't coming after me, I'm going to keep looking the other direction. That's how RU-vid is looking at it, I'm sure, why hurt their profits to protect "contractors".
@@SpiguyverBackpacking1 This seems very similar to the copyright issues they dealt with way back. It was profitable to work out a revshare with copyright holders and let users continue to post copyrighted materials.
Bob Corsaro 1 month ago @Spiguyver Backpacking because they are going to end up losing content if people are scared to post @@BobCorsaro thats the point I am at now I give up trying to post content because of govt over-reach, I am not nor will I ever be able to afford a permit to film. I called 2 days ago to get a permit for a place I was going to go in a couple of days and after everything said and done the total was $1019 for a 1 day trip over night. I don't have that kind of money so needless to say I am not going to do the over nighter now, nor will I be filming it or uploading it to youtube for that reason.
This is ABSOLUTELY FEDERAL gov’t overreach! I am leaving to thru hike the AT at the end of the month and will be carrying photography and camera gear to document my experience, if for no other reason than as a way to share it later with friends and family. But now, if I happen to be hiking with an active vlogger in a tramily, they could hassle and target me. UNACCEPTABLE!
Appreciate this video. They are also going after all the 2A channels. It’s all about control, all it is. I have to add, writing to your reps is a waste of time, they never see it, nor would it change their minds. Just my humble opinion.
Thanks for bringing attention to this important issue. We have had correspondence with Robert Corn-Revere, the lead attorney for Gordy Price in this case. He stated to us they petitioned the Supreme Court to hear this case in January, the government will submit its rebuttal this month, and the SCOTUS will decide whether they will take this case by June. Per conversations with the NPPA, they too have filed an amicus brief on the behalf of Gordy Price. The decision to determine filming as not an essential part of protected speech in a public space under 1A is not only unprecedented but unconstitutional We have decided to lean on the constitution and have continued to create content inside our home park of the Great Smokies. We are more than prepared to deal with whatever comes as a result. Thanks again!
I was talking to a friend last night about a video idea I had for Death Valley in the coming weeks. This morning I log into RU-vid, and your video is on my feed. First off, this is the first time I've seen your channel or watched your content. Nice video, and thanks for saving me from possible issues. I agree that the permit process is targeting major motion picture productions. I see it that they also want to make $$ on anyone who may get a dime from a film done in the National Parks. This seems stupid, because I know people who shoot vacation films and share it to their family via RU-vid privately, but still if leaked could case issues. Apparently, this change would effect them as well. Due to the fact the conversation I had last night just occurred, I think the 'smart tech' in the home picked up on something fed it to the various algorithms. I think that scares me more than anything else. I looked back on my channel as I have covered a lot of national parks over the past couple of years, and checked the dates. Fortunately, the last filming I did in a National Park occurred in during the ok to film period. Thanks again for providing this content.
The whole thing is a little stupid. Now the legal stance seems to be even if you don't monetize but post it on RU-vid it's considered commercial because RU-vid makes money off of it, whether directly or indirectly.
I'm also a content creator. My whole small channel is focused on national parks. I've been keeping up on this issue thru videos posted here on RU-vid. This beyond pisses me off. These places belong to us!
The best part of this video is that you gave people something they can do about it. Not that it will have much of an impact, but at least there's something.
@@SpiguyverBackpacking1 ... I worked in the Federal Government doing regulatory compliance and enforcement for 28 years and I can assure you, nobody is listening, and nobody cares. The government is not your friend and does not have your best interests in mind. When Trump took office and ordered all of the departments to ax 3 regulations for every new regulation issue and to take a compliance-first approach to governance (the only president I've seen do that since 1984), government employees immediately tried to find ways to disobey the order and impose as many regulations and fines as possible. With Biden, we can expect (and we are seeing) an authoritarian approach to everything (and eggs for $10/dozen).
This is messed up, thanks for bring light to the situation. I did not know about this. I have a small adventure channel and not monetized yet, but I definitely feel this is not right.
Thanks. That was a big part of putting this out there, I think there are thousands of creators who are breaking rules they don't know exist. The problem is they could be fined or arrested. For the travel channel I mentioned, they were notified via mail I believe, but had they not been checking their mail, and the time to respond expired, a warrant would have been issued for their arrest. It's no joking matter, it's happening.
Yep, this is all horseshit. I'm a dude with one GoPro, no props, no pack animals (lol), who hates talking and filming when people are nearby (I wait until I have space, so as not to disturb anyone). And I'm not monetized, BUT very well could be by time I make a video like this... Great information, and I'm going to write some letters on this.
They have also taken it upon themselves to change the meaning of commercial. Commercial used to mean just that, used for advertisements and promotions for products. Just because you make money with something, doesn't mean it's commercial use.
According to the Great Smoky Mountains NP website...Any Professional or amateur filming in areas open to the public 1-2 people with tripod camera only, no Permit or Fee is required. Anyone filming in areas not open to the public with crew over 5 that requires taking away of Park Personal and Resources from areas of need, a Permit and Fee are required. With the overwhelming increase in Visitors the last several years, and the tons of empty plastic water bottles left behind to prove it, a few million less visitors to our beautiful Natural Parks isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Thanks for sharing this info. I have looked at about 10 different parks that I am interested in going to and they all vary slightly in their rules around commercial filming. It’s certainly not a blanket policy. Some of them are not very clear either, which leads to other issues. Yeah, I’m with you on the number of visitors in the Parks, along with the lack of respect and littering that we all blatantly witness.
Thank you for posting this. I had no idea about these rules and I’m a small channel. Are they going to fine me for what I have already posted before I was monetized once I am monetized? Can they fine you for past content? You can’t do anything anymore. I wonder if you can write the permit off in your taxes then? It’s totally weird. You can film in public but not on public lands. We are not a Hollywood movie maker. Unbelievable. Then you have to pay some guy to go along with you while you film. Makes me wonder what they are hiding.
This is totally ridiculous! Arent we taxed enough? Now we have to pay for the privilege of sharing our adventures with others? I dont make any money off youtube. How can they justify fining you for something you did YEARS ago before the laws were in place, or before you earned money from it? How do you think this will affect my dog training videos? I have learned so much from watching hiking videos, so now I like to help others with my hiking and camping videos, and do I now have to worry about fines? Guess I better never ever show my dog off leash again! This really is nuts.
Don’t forget to add that your dog now counts as an actor or pack animal. They are probably trying to generate funds for each park. Especially as some want to sell off the parks or sell mining rights which if exposed would cost them money so criminalising the videography will allow them to commit crimes and get away with it.
Jill, I completely agree!! I don't see how they can come after people for just wanting to share their adventures. Alot of us reference videos to plan our own adventures and to expand our horizons. It just seems absurd!!
This is most definitely the government overstepping their bounds. I can understand putting regulation on large film crews but the guy with a GoPro and nothing else, come on. Why wouldn't the government want people to be filming in our national parts and forest? I would have to guess that a lot of RU-vidrs out there draw a lot of interest and draw a lot of attention to some of our national parks and forest thus increasing attendance to some degree. RU-vidrs such as yourself probably raise far more awareness then any government Park system ever will.
I work very closely with NPS and this is ridiculous. In every single video I've seen filmed inside a National Park, the creator follows the Leave No Trace guidelines and promotes it, they have respect for other visitors and they are PROMOTING the National Park! If anything, the NPS should be paying RU-vidrs. Inside their visitor centers, you will find books written and shirts sold with NPS names so how is filming from a phone any different? The bottom line is greed. I do hope enough people fight this. I want to protect the land but I do not support the NPS policies.
That is a good thing. Many think because they are not monetized, it doesn't effect them. But it actually does. RU-vid places ads all the time on my videos, but I am not monetized at all. So it does effect anything you post on RU-vid or even Facebook as well. Facebook does it too.
What needs to happen is a letter righting campaign to your representatives in Washington to stop this. Unless we become the squeaky wheel no one gets grease. Plain and simple. Talk to your representatives.
This is nuts. The US government is fu*king idiotic. It's overreaching at it's worst. I like to watch hiking videos and see all the beautiful places the US has to offer but I guess this is where my joy of watching these beautiful places is lower due to the fact that it's something that comes out of the content creators pocket. I feel sorry for the small channels that probably won't get a permit.
I understand the verbiage on the government web sites and what's going on. At the same time, has anyone with a channel reached out to PR departments regarding all of this? Even if they decline to comment can say that. Spoken to a lawyer about it? You're right that anything posted can come back to bite someone. Getting clarification while making these videos to raise awareness is needed.
@@SpiguyverBackpacking1 Saw that national forests also have these new rules, not just national parks. Just hope something is addressed before some channel out there is made an example of by some government lawyer.
I completely agree with you. But, there is one correction. This is not a law. Laws are passed by Congress. This is a regulation that is being imposed by appointed bureaucrats.; We need to write our congressional representatives and the White House to try to get them to reign these people in.
I work as a gold miner, self employed. In California we are not allowed to dredge for gold. This overreaching of government. Has been spreading up and down the west coast. Us gold miner's where ignored, when we warned people. That the government will start to permit, and restrict everything we do. It won't end with Gold Dredging. Now people are starting to see what we where saying. Yet it might be to late.
Well, maybe it's time to start voting for local, state and federal representatives that do NOT advocate for more top-down regulations and restrictions. 🤷
I wonder if you could create a new channel for each national park video... So when it's downloaded initially, it's not monetize but eventually your follows find it and you will make money on the backend? Just an idea, I'm sure you could get an attorney to find loopholes, they are always present!
Careful here guys. When you upload ANY video to RU-vid, monetized or not, you allow RU-vid the ability to monetize the video. Therefore, every single video uploaded to RU-vid is monetized. Maybe the cash doesn’t go in your pocket, but RU-vid can still Run ads on the video and keep 100%.
As the saying goes, the rich get richer and the poorer get poorer. Making it make no sense for small channels financially leaves more views for people seeking information for the big channels and movie companies. Another thought is where we're going in terms of gov control. Maybe someday I wont be able to hike through any park without insurance.
If the National Parks are public property and they charge for filming on it wait for then to start charging for filming in the entire public places 🤦♂️
I did write to my congressman (he is a man) about this recently. Have not heard a response. This is a NPS regulation and none of them are elected. I doubt if Congress is going to get involved too much if at all. I could go on a long rant about government agencies writing laws instead of legislatures who are elected to write laws but I will spare everyone that. In my case, I don't even do vlogs, I photograph wildlife and shoot some video when I'm set up to do stills. I'm not even "talking" into the camera, just filming a bird in the trees or a Der in a field as I'm shooting stills. Stills are fine, when I flip the switch to video, I'm breaking some regulation. It's crazy. Now, the question that nobody can answer, if I create a slide show to music which is a compilation of all my stills from the day, is that considered a "video" and have I broken the rules even though I was shooting stills? Who knows. Bottom line, I won't be taking photographs in any national parks until this muddy water gets cleared.
The government has nothing better to do than harass some RU-vidrs. Got to think of the most ridiculous thing as far as enforcement goes and that’s how the law will be applied. I watched a video where a guy was visited by the NPS police or FBI for flying his drone in a National park or forest or something to that effect and posting the video on RU-vid.
This is why we need younger law makers, we have so many laws that are so far behind technology. Commercial filming does have impact on parks which should be heavily regulated. However a small RU-vid channel shouldn't be in the same class as an avengers movie. They need different classifications for these things. It's like how internet companies make you get a phone when you purchase internet service. A long time ago government put subsidies on setting up phone lines so it was affordable to run lines out to the country. That way everyone could have a phone line and not just people in the city. They have never updated this for the internet which is the new phone line in many ways. Our government is full of very old stubborn men who don't care or understand about how technology is changing and how we keep up, so now stupid things like this happen. Stop the pointless culture war laws and pass actuall regulation that helps us move forward.
So it actually depends on the National Park. As I've been looking at a few others they can be tiered based on the number of people in the "production crew" starting at 1 and going up. But still it's quite painful to go through this entire process, let alone costly.
It's hard to feel sorry for people obviously breaking the law by street racing. Those are the people ruining it for everyone else. If you want to race, support your local racetrack.
I agree with you Edward. Unfortunately the local racetracks have been closing down in so many places. I just want people to be aware there are consequences to what you do and what you post.
Have you also heard that still photography is allowed! Which is sold as stock footage. This is just crazy. I will be writing my congressman. I’m sure if we all do this it may have some impact
@@SpiguyverBackpacking1 Oh wow, so like you said, every park has its own regulations. This sounds like a knee jerk to something that happened. No structure to it. I’m no where near monetization nor do i have aspersions to be, but who knows what the future holds. I will still write my congressman either way
Contact you congressional reps. They are the only ones that can do anything about it. We are a baby channel and plan not to monetize, too much comes along with the very little money you could make,. Last year a lot of our filming was at Gettysburg and Smoky Mountains National Park. We love making videos and the creativity that goes into it. All the more to never monetize. But when are they coming after the average person, that has us worried
So how is this going to work for people who reside in towns or on private properties that are within national parks? This sounds like you could be held liable for filming on your own property just because it's within the boundaries of a national park. This could be a problem for someone, like me , who film weather events in a town within a Tennessee park on the Appalachian trail but outside the recreational area before this took effect.
I'm not claiming I know the intent of these politicians. But shutting down small publishers this way, when larger venues are controlled in other ways, does fall in line with a government being able to push propaganda without others being able to say anything against. Just like in Russia.
@@SpiguyverBackpacking1 The experience history repeatedlyu tries to tell us, this is how people in power can easily end up if the population at large allows them to. So I guess that this is what comes out of just passively "hoping", I'm afraid.
Got a question about this law, does this apply to videos in national or state parks but the videos are not monetized? Is it only for videos that make money? So to get out of being fined couldnt you just set the video to not monetize it?
copied from forestry website: Commercial filming is defined as the use of motion picture, videotaping, sound recording, other moving image or audio recording equipment on National Forest System lands that involves the advertisement of a product or service, the creation of a product for sale, or the use of actors, models, sets or props, but not activities associated with broadcasts for news programs. For purposes of this definition, creation of a product for sale includes but is not limited to a film, videotape, television broadcast or documentary of historic events, wildlife, natural events, features, subjects or participants in a sporting or recreation event and so forth, when created for the purpose of generating income.
That's what I think it is, but the problem is if you have videos on RU-vid that are monitized, if you are stopped while in the National Park and they ask for your permit, how do you prove you were not going to monetize it? Or does that even matter? Might be a question we need to run by someone with some legal knowledge.
Thanks for sharing Mark! Definitely government overreach. Did you get approval to use the pictures behind you? 😂 joking, but definitely not funny that they are going after people just for sharing their adventurers and inspiring people.
Crazy all these new laws. No drones in National parks , but barking dogs and dog poop bags all over the trail . We have the "wilderness pass" in Oregon where you have to have your day pass and parking pass , but you also have to have the Wilderness permit per each person in your hike, but then people have several dogs. Like I can't bring a friend on a hike with me , but people got dogs all over the place.
Yeah, and I almost discussed drones on this video, but didn't. The number of places you can take a drone keeps shrinking. The wilderness pass situation sounds crazy. I remember loving that everything (wilderness areas) was free in Oregon, guess those days are gone.
@@jacobpoucher you sound like everyone else when I point out simple honest facts about the dog culture in 2022, whether I like dogs or not, is , not important. The fact that these government organizations allow kids to be maimed by dogs at a higher and higher rate along with dozens of other issues like dog waste everywhere and dogs scaring wild life , while they attack the common trail hikers just proves the point of this discussion. dog lobby and government are in bed together. Money can go wherever it wants and do whatever it wants , the dog lobby and industry is huge and even has connections to big pharma, why do you think they allow dogs to make so much mayhem at the campgrounds and shit all over the Oregon Coast ? They don't want to scare away their cash cow.
@@SpiguyverBackpacking1 we still have lots of free stuff , the wilderness permit system as of right now is not all year and not every where, but like you mention they have all sorts of caveats
@Jeff Myers sounds like a parenting issue if kids are being maimed by dogs. Where are you getting this info. I was subbed to you too. Your pretty good at playing with string
The intent of the original law was to provide for the reimbursement of monies spent by the NPS/FS in assisting/permitting/monitoring large film crews that required special treatment because of their impact on normal park operations. Think closing down roads for a shot, or keeping other park visitors out of working sets, site remediation (if necessary), etc. It was NOT to provide the Feds with another revenue stream or to decide who is allowed to exercise free speech on PUBLIC LANDS.
You're probably dead on with that, unfortunately like so many other things, this is getting twisted and shaped into something it was not intended to be.
Facebook is doing same thing to business owners using their platform that sell merchandise. A local business owner doesn’t know from one day to the next what she can or can’t do. It’s crazy. Social media owns us.
My ten cents worth......I agree with your initial sentiment where the law concerning commercial filming as you describe it is ridiculous and hugely inhibitive.......could be easily solved to allow small impact activity and still ensure the Parks are covered for legal indemnify.......develop an annual licensing to cover content creators national access (small reasonable fee).This would make the content creators be responsible for knowing the conditions of the individual parks and be liable if they break the rules or if their activity results in damage or cost recovery for the park. As for your other views, street racing or other activity that you would not do in front of witnesses or law enforcement......if you are stupid enough to be publishing that then it’s not government over reach. It seems ridiculous to suggest that law enforcement should ignore illegal activity that is published on youtube........because you like it? What kind of society do you want. I don’t understand........is it because your idea of freedom is so entrenched that any infringement on that is unacceptable
I appreciate your comment. I was really making the video to raise the awareness, first of the rules and laws put in place for the wild places so many of us enjoy, but also to show that we are all ultimately responsible for the content we produce and share. For the street racing one, I think it's play stupid games, win stupid prizes. But for something like driving through a stream on private property, it starts to feel too invasive. There was no ill intent with that video, there was no destructive intent, it was crossing a stream to get to a field on the other side, all on private property. However I do also believe that there should be much less focus on victimless crime. Sure, what is viewed as victimless can absolutely include a victim at some point, but it's a fine line on some things.
@@SpiguyverBackpacking1 thanks for reply, As far as the crossing a stream like you describe seems absolutely trivial, and if that’s all it was then I would whole heartedly agree with you. However I am aware that sometimes law enforcement can sometimes be drawn into these petty type infringements when they are faced with a mountain of maybe circumstantial evidence on other illegal activity but cannot for one reason or other convict on that but can bring other charges (for instance Al Capone - tax evasion).......dirty trick and potentially ethically flawed. As for victimless crime that argument seems to be a double edged sword....... State Parks are doing themselves a huge disservice by over complicating and over charging low impact filming activities and I hope they realise this
I really do feel for you and small channels and vlogger types, yet the past few years there has been an influx of content craters flocking to the wilderness with a ton of camera gear and drones, narrating to themselves and ruining the peace and quiet that everyone is there for. Like with everything else a few bad apples have ruined it for all. Seems the answer is just demonetize videos filmed in the parks to chase away the people there for work and not pleasure.
Scott ... you sound like a park administrator. The equipment that hikers carry with them is irrelevant to "ruining the peace and quiet that everyone is there for". It's the hikers themselves that cause problems, not their cameras. I think the real motive here is that the Department of Interior really doesn't want ANYONE in their parks or on their lands. The department of interior is NOT any visitor's friend, with or without a camera.
Aww too bad. They’re just enforcing the rules and regulations they already had. You can blame yourselves for monetizing your channels. RU-vidrs are just upset because it affects them. Never mind that it’s you guys that are part of the over crowding and disrespect to our parks and forests. And you need to get your facts straight. The Supreme Court didn’t say it was unconstitutional. It was a circuit court, which was then overturned on appeal.
Disastrous. I make kayak camping edits and this is going to make paddling places like the Buffalo river cost thousands of dollars. I’m hopeful some reasonable rules will be established for individuals like us but until then, I’ll just have to avoid national parks.
I'd imagine we will see this in the Supreme Court if the National Parks system decided to prosicutes a youtuber . my guess, they won't unless there is a production team.
@Spiguyver Backpacking Yes, I feel we will see it in the courts again under the new regulations, but my guess is they won't be prosecuting anyone unless an "issue " happens or someone pushes the envelope too far.
You can't control your audience, but you are ultimately responsible for the content you choose to put out there. If it involves illegal activities you have to be ready to face the consequences.
This is such BS! I am speechless with how ridiculous this is. This is completely outrageous. There has to be something that can be done. Is this really the "land of the free" anymore?! What has happened to our country?!
I don't know. guess we'll see how this all plays out, maybe ti will be a lot of nothing, and it''s not enforced at all, but there is always that risk...
@@billb3374 ... You have it all wrong. Cops don't create laws and they don't get to choose which laws they'll enforce - the politicians are the source of all of this. This administration wants your obedience and your dependence on them, and they won't stop using police to do their dirty work.
@@lcdrjsmasterson I'm not wrong in any way. Cops absolutely have discretion on what laws they enforce. You have sheriff's across the country refusing to enforce new gun laws. You raised the point government corruption yet you defend the very ones actually inflicting the tyranny on the people. That makes no sense.
Q how does this new law (which is crappy and needs to be overturned btw) pertain to hobbyist photographers who sell their pictures (small potatoes imo but wanted to ask as it was a plan of mine...) of what is taken during personal vacations in and around national parks? Or is this only filming?
There is a section to this that does apply to still photography as well, but for both video and still it is only for those who are making money off their work.
@Spiguyver Backpacking okay thank you for your response... so I would be in this bubble if I decided to sell any photography even as a hobby. Sad as that was my dream in retirement years. I hope people out there reach out to their government officials and fight this if there is a petition please let us know! Also unsure how they have the manpower to enforce this as national parks are already hurting for workers like the rest of the country.
When you film in a National Park and post on RU-vid you are making defacto travelogues that encourage more people to visit the park. More people means more staff and facilities are required. That costs money. Also, a very small, but significant number of creators violate the rules, get too close to wildlife, climb past barricades, fly drones, disrupt other visitors etc. This requires additional enforcement. The permit system allows the Park Service an opportunity to make sure creators know and understand the rules. Though I don't think they should be treated like Hollywood productions, or charged anywhere near the same, I do think a reasonable permit system is probably justified.
I can agree with some of what you're saying. I could be okay with a common sense permit system if it was even remotely easy to navigate and the cost was low to nothing. Other than that, this is system is just crap!
the statute needs amending for private citizens to be able to film with small handheld devices. will it ever happen? im not optimistic, seems like they do stuff monthly that violates our rights and we never get them back once gone. for that reason i doubt itll be amended.....but, bet your sweet ass those 87k new irs guys are coming for uncle sams chunk of that youtube content creators bank account
There is a interview with a lawyer I seen about 2 weeks ago. Even I'd you don't monetize the video it is still considered commercial as RU-vid can abd does make money from your content.
Isn't anyone curious what they don't want you to catch on video? It's very easy to figure out. Too many people are learning what goes on in the forest and what is in the forest. Too much is being exposed so they're cutting it off now. I also believe they have foreign cells that they're going to have out there. There's a lot going on. They don't want anyone catching anything on film and throwing it on RU-vid or anywhere else. So jmo, actually based on a lot of research. I feel I had to share this. PS, Andrew Dawson recently video a Giant on top of a mountain. Tic Tac Channel, they were after him and now he's officially gone. Pull his name up it's all over RU-vid. Actually watch his videos if you want to really know. I don't think they're going to reverse the law this time
I agree completely! Our government has been overreaching their boundary for a LONG time. Just think if the 1st and 2nd amendment disappears! We The People, need to be more vocal (including myself first). There are certain demographics that complain all the time, and they get the attention. I hate to say it, but we need to be more like them in being more vocal and stand up for what is right. Squeaky wheel gets the grease!
Well, after all, we didn't pay anything for those parks did we? Not any taxes or such?! Btw, you'd better think about all those videos you made at the Wichita Mountains! Didn't have a permit for those did you? Geeez, government really getting ridiculous!!
This is a blatant violation of the 1st amendment. I get it for a big production company but for smaller channels or just people who want to video their travels that’s directly violating their constitutional right. Not right at all. Too much overreach there’s days leave us alone.
Are we sure this effects makers like you and folks casually shooting? The BLM site specifically calls out "Filming activities...that involve the use of actors, models,sets, and/or props"
BLM has more lax rules, and each National Park has their own level of discretion, but yes, this certainly does impact the smallest of RU-vid creators as long as they are monetizing their videos. Check the links, specifically the NPS and NFS links.
Sorry but this is fair. I would hate to be out enjoying a dream vacation and have some idiot telling me to get out of the way, okay hyperbolization. But this is nothing new.
this is absolutely crazy. we have a right to film anywhere we want. I have my own RU-vid channel and do a lot of hiking videos. I share my own journeys with everyone. thanks for sharing this information
So basicly it covers all PUBLIC LAND IN THE UNITED STATES is so delicate that a person taking a video will destroy it. How about the video you take with your dash cam when driving around the park or even on any public land. I lived in the South West for about 38 years and the forest service, and BLM wanted to control every peace of land and keep the public off of it,even though it belongs to the people of this country. Over the years I lived out there, I have seen millions of achers of public land closed off to the public, because of a tortus of some endangered bug. now it is because of a camera ?
Okay, just trying to bring awareness that everyone is responsible for what they do and post. If you put something out there, you need to be ready for the consequences of it.
@Spiguyver Backpacking this is the main reason they are pushing digital currency so hard, they will track every dollar you have and make sure they're cut is accounted for. So much stuff is already cash-less.
That's not a lie. They are now hitting you up for selling things using PayPal or other avenues. It's gotten crazy. We're taxed on our income, then taxed when we buy something, then taxed again when we sell the thing we bought... WTF
There are to many thru hike vloggers already the trail (and backpacking itself) is nothing like it used to be (probably because of vloggers and social media) it's a shame. I could give or take at vloggers.
It's a lot deeper than one person, if you think any single person has the power, you're very much misinformed. But for this, I just don't get it at all, this is craziness.
This is at least 10 years old, it's not some new immediate threat. And it's not just one guy, one administration, or even one party. Government overreach is bipartisan.
Actually it was just put in place in October 2022 as a response to the Supreme Court ruling that the fine to the other channel was illegal and unconstitutional.
@@SpiguyverBackpacking1 I'm referring to Public Law 106-206 from 2007 that appears to have established the permit for commercial filming. Individual cases after the fact are certainly interesting, and I definitely wouldn't want to be a RU-vidr fighting through setting a precedent. I'm just saying that it's not some new issue popping up out of nowhere.
You realize he's talking about a supreme court that is highly conservative right now. FDT for stacking it like that if anything. It's his judges that are making these rulings.
