• jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    When you rent a domicile to someone you are responsible for guaranteeing their private use and enjoyment of the domicile without undie restrictions for the term of the agreement.

    If somebody films in the domicile, it’s none of lessor’s business. Do you think every talking head YouTuber who films a talking head piece from a hotel needs to get approval from the hotel? How about ticktokers? What about people doing personal video calls with there family?

    No, it would be a unreasonable burden for someone’s quiet enjoyment of their domicile to not be able to film.

    As stipulated in the posters question there is no legally actionable recourse to a landlord for just filming in the location.

    • Stern@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      AieBnB owners can set a guest limit, and I’d have to imagine saying a max of (to pick a random number) ten guests isn’t an unreasonable burden, so in that hypothetical… but I’m guessing that particular AirBnB owner didn’t put a guest limit in place, so all they can really do is pursue extra cleanup charges if applicable.

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          Objects don’t have rights, people do. You can require your consent to be in a monetized video, but a house doesnt have consent to give haha. If you don’t want someone filming the inside of your property, don’t allow them in. Especially don’t ask them to pay you to come in.

          • stinky@redlemmy.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            Don’t be angry at me, you’re the one who focused on the wrong words. It was one sentence my guy, all you had to do was read it to the end. Lol. Have a day 🫱

            • Stern@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              Right back at ya king. It was one sentence, all you had to do was read it to the end.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m pretty sure, in private residential transactions, breaching a policy or rule is not grounds for a lawsuit, it may be grounds for terminating the lease. But assuming this person has vacated the property by the time it was discovered, it’s a moot issue