Cameras in Massage Parlours

[Peter G]

I stopped going to massage parlours with cameras.
The last place I went to, they had two cameras that I know of.
One cam outside. And another one as you were leaving and the image
could be seen on the operators' labtop that was opened, exposing the image..
Any image that goes from camera to computer can be recorded.
Thus they get my thumbs down

 

[Hamster Tycoon]

Like I already said on this forum, yes there is cameras in MANY massage rooms. I worked for many years in the video surveillance industry and I got many contracts to install them in massage parlor, strip clubs, etc... And since I worked with cameras for long time I can spot hidden/spy camera anywhere and let me tell you that there is even spy cameras at places where you would never think about it.

There is nothing to worry about that. They use cameras to check if the girls do extras when they are not tolerated or to check if the client do something wrong to the girls/place. If you really think they have fun with this and put this on internet for voyeurism then you are really dumb....

 

[RawrRawrDino]

Bunch of threads merged.

 

[bhai_saddam]

Dragonatic, as we have already told you, we will believe you the day you provide proof of it : what massage parlor, what room, where in the room?

 

[Roger]

I dont care if you dont believe me..... I just said that for the people that would like some informations. There is the "professionnal secret" here. Most of the salon did not want to tell about the spy cameras so I'm not gonna tell you wich ones.... But its easy, most of them in montreal lol

 

[Coma White (jsts22)]

Gugu, Dragonatic's opinion is one guy's opinion. People believe him or not, their choice. As long as he's not pointing to a specific MP, no rules are broken and no proofs are required.

Here's another man's opinion: as a rule of thumb, it's not a bad idea to expect all MP have some cameras. People accept the fact or don't go to MP. I took the second option a long time ago.

 

[Babby Joshua Christomato]

LOSE THE CAMS
AND MAKE MORE MONEY WITH REPEAT BUSINESS...

The parlors spend good money bringing in the bacon spenders but
then totally mess it up with cameras...
Jeez how absolutely stupid....
At the very least be discreet about how you are going to
view the images and the camera smack at the entrance before the guy even comes in?
Might as well install a shot gun for gods' sake..
Or the laptop opened for every eye to see the camera captured image as we walk towards the room..
Like ...is that good enough reason to never set a foot inside again?
Now I realise that a few feathers may feel ruffled by it and those feathers are the owners of the parlours who spend coin to get their name here..but for gods' sake
wake up and lose your cams....P.S. this topic will not go away...just a question of time someone will repaste a list of cam-congested parlours that us lobbyists will choose to avoid....
Does it have to get to that point before mp operators capeesh????Anyways I am not going back to that place on H bourassa.

 

[Becky Curta]

Baro, if somebody paste a list of MP with cameras, they'll get in trouble and the list will get deleted by us. Why? We don't tolerate rumors and hearsay. That list would need to be backed-up with proof for each parlor listed.

 

[mary c]

For those who are suspicious, you should spend $25.00 and buy yourself a hidden camera detector.
http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/security/9fe1/

Massage girls should also get camera detectors too, in case some visitors have hidden cam stylo or hidden cam watch...
http://www.sherbrooke-electroniques.com/Camera-Espion-cbqaaaaaa.asp

 

[Manah]

Even if commented by a mod a few posts further, should this list stay?

http://eforum.xxx.ca/vbulletin/show...ssage-Parlours&p=534584&viewfull=1#post534584

 

[WOWbrandywineWOW]

Hi Gugu

I just took a few out. If anybody find more, please let me know. eforum.xxx can't leave such accusations if legal proofs aren't provided. Leaving them out would expose eforum.xxx to multiple lawsuits, from loss revenues to defamation. We don't want to go there.

 

[Clo !]

If mp operators are arerogant enough to hook up cams that lead into labtops and pcs
then the clientelle has the right to be informed...Why? Because they are the ones paying..

 

[joeyharrington2002]

I believe there were new privacy laws passed last October with severe penalties. Hidden cams are not permitted in a public place. Recordings have to be erased within 30 days. I suspect many salons that have cameras are not even aware of the new privacy laws.

 

[aiko is a girl]

Never forget that hobbying is flirting with illegality. If you can't stand the idea that your better half - or better six and a half - may be featured in a home video, then stay home and watch the election coverage.

But then again, if you're willing to risk a bit and bank on the parlor operator's desire to keep the client happy by erasing all videos when the client has left, then so be it.

I'm a capitalist.

 

[teacup]

Your statement does not really hold up. No parlor operator would ever even admit that they have cameras in the first place, let alone that that are recording the sessions. How then could he please the client by erasing the videos when they don't even have cameras! It's sort of like a cop telling you you're lucky that he's already met his quota for the day, so he's not going to give you a ticket. Get real! That's never gonna happen.

 

[Noe diaz- weaver]

.... I suspect many salons ( inclusing the visitors) don't care or don't bother with many laws and regulations on several aspects!

 

[ST3PHii<3]

It might be useful to know what category of statements cannot be made without providing legal proofs. For example, there are all kinds of statements that are made in reviews, without providing legal proof, that may cause clients to avoid certain salons. For example: the place was dirty, the showers smelled, the jucuzzi was filty, the receptionist was rude, they systematically short change you on the time, I saw a rat, etc. What type of statements are allowed, and which type are not (without providing legal proofs)?

 

[Itz shaquanda boo]

I just do not understand what is so complicated for you guys to understand. Accusing a MP of having cameras, recording or not, in the rooms where clients get nude (it is legal to get nude while having a massage), is accusing them of something illegal. You can’t make these accusations freely without proofs. You guys are unknown people talking behind a nickname. These MP are not, contrary to you, anonymous. They have a public address and are doing business in the eyes of everybody, including LE, just like any other business. Letting these accusations go freely is opening a huge battlefield for every MP to start attacking other MP’s using anonymous nicknames. Others can contradict the information, do you say? No. That is reversal of the responsibility of proof. Unacceptable.

Surveillance cameras in the rooms of a MP are illegal. Period.

Surveillance cameras at the entrance and in the corridors of a MP are an other matter. They are used for same purpose as in any other commerce: dissuasion against theft and violence. In some places they are hidden, in other places you can see them easily. They are used in virtually all MP’s in Québec City and, I am convinced, it is the same in Montreal. Are they recording? Of course they are. And the recordings can be held for 30 days in accordance to the recognized practices in Canada. You don’t like that? Then don’t go to massage parlours.

The legality of those surveillance systems is a complex issue. As techman said previously, a sigh should inform you of the presence of such cameras. I have never seen such a sign in a MP but, honestly, I have never looked for it. You think they should not be allowed? Go ahead: sue them! I am not going to. I agree with their presence and I think they work in favour of my protection.

Someone suggested previously that they could be used against you should a bust occur in a MP that happens to be a bawdy house. False. To get arrested in such a bust, you have to be in the said bawdy house at the moment of the bust. A recording of you at the entrance of a bawdy house cannot be used against you.

 

[Izzy r]

Oli, your crap is good for the other board where you should stay, with all the servile defenders of the merc owner. Over there, "freedom of speech" includes publication of private communications and any accusation coming out of their trouble minds.

Since I have responded previously, on this board, on the question your asked about me being the owner of EQ, I ask you to retract because you clearly want to maintain the doubt about that. Otherwise, I am asking you to provide proof of it.

I thank you for trying to make my education about the situation in the MP's industry. But I am certainly not going to take seriously a guy who has profited, like you did, from the vulnerability of so many girls and who pushes the limits by spreading photographs of them over the Internet. As far as I am concerned, your principles, you can can shovel them up your ass.

 

[? I Like To Dance ?]

Looks like the thread is getting out of control and will need some cleaning here very soon.

Camera's are now everywhere anyhow, so why bother ? Except in private rooms unless advice otherwise or being aware of.

This being said, here is a question: How about the pornsites showing sex videos without the consent of one of the parties? What are the internet rules and applicables laws?

:amen: