PC World - rude and threatening

biscit

UK2010 wrote: »

I wouldn't have taken a photo, afterall it is private property. I would have made a draft text with the details I wanted.

I've photographed labels in the past, and it never occured to me that the store may have a problem. I would have stopped had someone approached an politely asked me not to, without any implication that I was up-to-no-good.

We are getting to up-tight and paranoid about people who take photographs. As a society we need to loosen up.

We should not be paranoid, it is an ugly and unplesant emotion and it is rude to express it.

biscit

barvid wrote: »

He may have thought you were photographing laptops to try to work out a way to defeat the security (that always gets triggered if you so much as touch a key). I agree it was a bit OTT though. If you were photographing the CCTV cameras I'd have stopped you. If you were photographing the merchandise I'd assume you were interested in maybe buying it.

While that makes sense, it's not an entirely obvious conotation. While it is possible that someone taking a photo in a store is doing such a thing, the probability that someone spotted taking a photograph in a public space (or private space open to the public) is doing anything wrong is really low. So if a member of the public has taken a photograph, any approach to them should be handled very carefully and delicately so as to avoid potential offence to someone who is very likely to have done nothing wrong.

(I am assuming there were no signs forbidding photography).

marleyboy

jamesb1239 wrote: »

I believe its actually to do with the Windows product key stickers stuck to the computers, our PC World and Staples had a problem with this a while ago, people were going in and photographing the code on the Certificate of Authenticity then going home and installing whatever, that way saving a fortune on buying a new copy of windows, the downside being if the person who eventually buys that display model ever tries to input that code after a re-install or something the activation would fail.

I never thought of that. What a good idea; to think I paid fortune for Windows7

UK2010

biscit wrote: »

We are getting to up-tight and paranoid about people who take photographs. As a society we need to loosen up.

Do you think the relatives of the deceased on the planes of 9/11 will agree with you? Ok not on the same level but surely the understanding of what might seem to one as perfectly innocent might not really be the case for several reasons for people in the know, Marleyboy now has new knowledge of how to register Windows 7 from just a photo without paying! . Why should the public demand what should be photo'd and what shouldn't given the above examples?

UK2010

biscit wrote: »

We are getting to up-tight and paranoid about people who take photographs. As a society we need to loosen up.

Just out of interest if you raised this complaint about taking photos and they took your advice and freely allowed them, then you bought a PC tried to register the software and found due to a photo being taken in the store you purchased from following your opinion on the matter that someone else has now registered it what would you do?

custardy

UK2010 wrote: »

Just out of interest if you raised this complaint about taking photos and they took your advice and freely allowed them, then you bought a PC tried to register the software and found due to a photo being taken in the store you purchased from following your opinion on the matter that someone else has now registered it what would you do?

contact M$
if no joy with them then take it back to store and get it replaced

Laz123

UK2010 wrote: »

Do you think the relatives of the deceased on the planes of 9/11 will agree with you? Ok not on the same level but surely the understanding of what might seem to one as perfectly innocent might not really be the case for several reasons for people in the know, Marleyboy now has new knowledge of how to register Windows 7 from just a photo without paying! . Why should the public demand what should be photo'd and what shouldn't given the above examples?

I agree completely. The OP could have easily used the photos to fly a jumbo jet into PC World.

Hey, just be careful out there.

UK2010

Laz123 wrote: »

I agree completely. The OP could have easily used the photos to fly a jumbo jet into PC World.

Err, no they couldn't! What I'm saying is people can't go round private property saying they can photo what they like. Also there are times unlike what Biscit suggests when it's not wrong to be paranoid. When it's private property people can be as paranoid as they like, they own the place!

CharlieBilly

I do it all time even in B&Q because web sites dont always show the entire stock and sometimes its easier to go back home for measurements or comparisons etc

Ivory_Tinkler

Maybe the OP could come back and tell us if they made a complaint and how they got on? It would be interesting to hear PC World's official explanation on this.