Stuyvesant Town's Photo Backlash

If you can't send the photos, you may be able to offload them on to your computer using something as simple as a micro USB cable. It all depends on your particular phone and what sort of data connection(s) it has.

On the topic of the pix - I don't think T/S could have done any better if they'd actually gone out and commissioned these photographs - what a bunch of dunces.

This is just like with the pointless "No furniture or we'll prosecute" signs - they could have achieved the same goal, and built goodwill instead of wasting it, if they'd said something like "leaving old furniture in the trash rooms makes it difficult to move and creates a potential fire hazard. Accordingly, we are asking that residents not leave their old furniture in the trash rooms and instead contact us through our management office, where we will be happy to schedule a convenient time for us to remove the furniture for you." They have the trucks, and the dumpsters necessary to dispose of old furniture, so it wouldn't even have put them to any additional cost.

I just cannot believe how stupid they are, that they so consistently do exactly what will only get them more of what they're trying to avoid in the first place.

Please--don't deny us. You probably have some great photos, but some phones don't let you download directly. Keep hitting those little buttons until you find the option to send as a photo message.

At one point the walls they built blocked sufficient amounts of air and light from entering the apartments and the fire department deemed them a hazard to fire fighters and first responders.

So the walls they use today are "up to code"? I can't imagine even Tishman Speyer so egregiously thumbing their nose at the law.

You can't? Why? They did the first time!

I'm not sure if they are up to code now. A few tenants told me they still have illegal walls in their apartments but don't want to be bothered dealing with mgmt to have them removed. I don't blame them since it was the tenants who footed the bill during wallgate.

At the risk of feeding a "troll" - on what basis?

Haha, I remember that. Last summer some friends at 17 S.O. had a wall torn down and a new one put up (at ST's expense) because the old wall violated fire code.

Then I remember when I had my wall put up I found a wall contractor that could do it for $400 LESS but couldn't use him because he wasn't a Stuy Town 'approved vendor' - aka one that wasn't getting a kickback from management.

Really? Which man? The one with his back turned or the two I blurred beyond recognition? You can barely spell let alone bring on a lawsuit.

nobody has the right to take my image and post it on line

Nobody did. Nobody will.

That's not quite the way the law sees it. There's a useful collection of squibs regarding NY privacy law as it bears on photographic matters here: http://www.rcfp.org/photoguide/states/newyork.html

Basically, you don't have standing unless the image was published for commercial purposes or had no relationship to a legitimate news-worthy event.

Since the relevant criteria are satisfied, you would almost certainly have no cause of action.

However, that is really all beside the point, because what you do have is a very discriminating (in the good sense, folks) blog editor who, to date, does not appear to have published any images containing recognizable likenesses of any person - that gent in the blue shirt walking by the truck cannot be specifically identified just from the content of the image. In practice, it is the good judgment of the publisher that effects the best protection of legitimate privacy interests, whether or not those are legally cognizable interests.

well i recognized one of the people as my next door neighbour and this is certainly not a legitimate news worthy event. again if it were me i would have sued.

I was thinking more along the lines of the Kowloon Walled City

liar

sorry i keep on forgetting, you are the only one that tells the truth.

Which of these photos are lies exactly?

first i just said that since you think i am a liar, you are must be the only one that tells the truth. by the way one of the pictures you posted "thash is the new luxury" was taken over 1 year when they were redoing the oval loops.

I think it was Julius Tishman who built those sumptuous tenements that Jacob Riis visited. Must be something that gets passed down in the blood because now Tishman Speyer has converted what was NOT a tenement into a tenement.

You leave Eastern Europe to escape the kind of police state environment that you not only condone, but appear to actively encourage in your adopted country. Your stunning lack of self-awareness only adds to the aura of idiocy that envelopes each and every one of your posts.

I think you might want to explain that comment, yetai.

For one trolling shmaltsik? I don't think so.

And you'd have had your complaint tossed, with costs assessed if you weren't careful. The very fact that the image is part of this reportage, and the fact that the deteriorating conditions of the property are an objectively reasonable topic for people to be interested in, and interested in hearing news about, means that these photographs, in this context, are probably of legitimate newsworthy content almost as a matter of law.

Yes, that image was taken over a year ago and some were taken today. Tishman Speyer has been fucking up the property for a while now. That's the point I'm making. You have a flare for the obvious. Learn to spell.

Chill, Luxie. I was going to take it on but decided the obvious needn't be explained.

OK i am going to ay it since no one else will...

skibummonel... you are a moron.

In case the word "moron" is too many syllables for you, here is the definition:

"1. a person who is notably stupid or lacking in good judgment.
2. Psychology. a person of borderline intelligence in a former classification of mental retardation, having an intelligence quotient of 50 to 69."

It is a good rule of thumb to actually know what you are talking about before you type.