Violent bagpipe player outside cathedral

[stewartza]

Last week I walked into Santiago with a Spanish man whom I had met whilst walking. As we approached the steps to go down to the Praza de Obradoiro in front of the cathedral we heard and saw a man dressed traditionally playing the bagpipes. My friend said he would like to take a photo of him. The bagpipe player stopped playing and turned his back to my friend. When my friend asked him why, the bagpipe player became aggressive, swore at my friend and knocked him to the ground with a vicious punch to the jaw.
We went immediately to the police and laid a charge of assault which, when it went to court was successful.
The police had urged my friend to lay the charge as this bagpipe player was well known as being aggressive to pilgrims, none of whom had ever laid a charge, therefore the police were powerless to act against him.
Besides receiving a fine and having to pay the costs of the court this man's name is now on the penal register as a vicious, aggressive person. Should he act in such a way again the police will now be able to act promptly against him.
Be wary of him if you come across him.

 

[mylifeonvacation]

Last October we saw him (assuming it is the same guy) and I also thought it would make a nice image with the art on the door and everything. Like your friend, I went to take the photo and he turned his back to me. It seemed odd, but I just snapped the pic (captioning it "gaitero taking a break"), dropped some coins in his container and went on my way. Never would have imagined someone electing to work in this way, and in the main pilgrim walking thoroughfare, would become violent towards those from whom he is making his living! I'm glad your friend reported this.

 

[Icacos]

Thanks for the warning. As I wasn't there, I can't comment on how the altercation played out, but perhaps the bagpipe player expected a donativo in exchange for having his picture taken. I haven't travelled extensively but I recall going to one country and being advised 'to tip first' if we expected service. Just a thought ...

 

[BlackDog]

I always hold my camera up and look questioningly at the person, if it is a polite nod then I take a photo, if the indication is a finger pointed at his hat then I go donativo, if it is a negative gesture then I move on. The guy playing the bagpipes usually turns his back.

 

[mylifeonvacation]

tip first'

This is a great reminder. I always tip, but obviously the person isn't a mind reader and doesn't know that in advance. @BlackDog's comment is right on too. In my case, this gaitero kept his back turned long after the coins landed in his case and we had walked away, but I will modify my ways in the future. Of course, I'll leave this guy completely alone in the future if he's there. Good discussion.

 

[William Garza]

Same

I always hold my camera up and look questioningly at the person, if it is a polite nod then I take a photo, if the indication is a finger pointed at his hat then I go donativo, if it is a negative gesture then I move on. The guy playing the bagpipes usually turns his back.

.same here...simplifys matters.
When i photograph surfers, they will wave or gesture the universal what..or begin to show what they have.

One asked if he could see what i took..then offered me cash...I told him the Joy and life in his riding was enough payment.
30 pics sent later.

 

[Theatregal]

It is very important to post information about any kind of crime or violence as in the OP but I think it's also important that photographs of people not be posted on the "assumption" or "possibility" that they are connected to the crime.

 

[SYates]

I always hold my camera up and look questioningly at the person, if it is a polite nod then I take a photo, if the indication is a finger pointed at his hat then I go donativo, if it is a negative gesture then I move on. The guy playing the bagpipes usually turns his back.

Exactly! And couldn't agree more. Ask first and no need to escalate things from either side.
No, I don't condone violence towards photographers, I am one.
Equally I do condone the right to decide of every person to decide to has his/her picture taken. I am a person also.
Buen Camino, SY

 

[Mark Lee]

A violent, fist-swinging bagpipe player in Santiago. Almost comical if the idiot didn't assault pilgrims/tourists. Sure, he's playing for donations, but he's also in a public place, playing a musical instrument and bringing attention to himself in a spot where hundreds, if not thousands of people pass by everyday. It's not unreasonable that out of all those people, not all are going to tip you, and with the common presence of cameras these days, some are going to film you. Don't like that, then get a regular job that doesn't require interacting with the public. Otherwise suck it up, buttercup.
Don't get me wrong, I know they ain't out there for free and I throw coins in musician coffers all the time in Santiago, but no excuse for punching the dude, even if he was being a bit nosy.

 

[dougfitz]

Equally I do condone the right to decide of every person to decide to has his/her picture taken.

There is no such right in most countries around the world. If you are in a public place or can be seen from a public place, a photographer is perfectly entitled to capture your image as a photograph. Any individual's rights are associated with the publication of images for commercial reward, which in most cases is not permitted without an individual giving their explicit permission. The general exceptions are press photography for images considered 'newsworthy'. And I am aware that there are places where photography generally is banned near military installations and other public buildings, immigration halls at airports, ports and other border crossings, etc, etc.

 

[Mark Lee]

Speaking of musicians, there was a street violin player I saw in Santiago last time I was there. Don't remember exactly where, but it was near the cathedral, maybe near where the old pilgrim's office was. Wow, he was good.

 

[dougfitz]

Speaking of musicians, there was a street violin player I saw in Santiago last time I was there. Don't remember exactly where, but it was near the cathedral, maybe near where the old pilgrim's office was. Wow, he was good.

We arrived on a wet and miserable morning when it was quiet, and the Prazo Obradorio was empty. The transformation into the vibrant, music filled square later in the day when the rain stops is, for me, part of the magic of the camino.

 

[SYates]

There is no such right in most countries around the world. If you are in a public place or can be seen from a public place, a photographer is perfectly entitled to capture your image as a photograph. Any individual's rights are associated with the publication of images for commercial reward, which in most cases is not permitted without an individual giving their explicit permission. The general exceptions are press photography for images considered 'newsworthy'. And I am aware that there are places where photography generally is banned near military installations and other public buildings, immigration halls at airports, ports and other border crossings, etc, etc.

We are a wee bit more strong on that general rule in Europe, it is called 'right to your own likeness being captured' or 'right to your image being taken' in (hazy on the exact translation there). It boils down that in Europe that

Unless you are a figure of real political/social public interest, your rights of deciding what happens with your own likeness are yours to decide.
Meaning, even if you turn up in a medieval costume at a tourist site, the decision if somebody can take, no speaking of use, your likeness is still yours.

Complicated business, so I agree, better ask than be sorry for not asking.

Buen Camino, SY

 

[GettingThere]

I tend to agree that people should be asked if they will allow their photograph to be taken, whatever the law says about rights. However, I do also feel it is a little bit disingenuous for someone to dress up in costume and stand at the one point where virtually every pilgrim entering Santiago will pass (not to mention thousands of regular tourists), playing the bagpipes, and then get all coy when someone tries to take a photo. I saw this happen myself last year, when someone raised their camera and the man went into this rather over-the-top pantomime of throwing his arms over his face (he wasn't holding the pipes at the time!) and turned away. No suggestion of violence then, but I have to admit I thought it seemed a little prima-donna-ish. Although as I say, of course he should have the right to refuse to be photographed. I think he was also selling his CDs, so maybe there were some commercial concerns playing into the reluctance. Doesn't explain or excuse the aggression though.

 

[dougfitz]

Although as I say, of course he should have the right to refuse to be photographed.

There are clearly many complications here, but in general the application of rights to privacy that would allow someone to stop an image being captured only apply on private property or where an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy. It makes me wonder if merely placing a sign with a 'no photography' symbol or the like is considered sufficient to create such an expectation in what might otherwise clearly be a public place where no such expectation would be reasonable.

There are, of course, circumstances where it would clearly be impractical when taking images in a public place to give everyone who might appear in the image the right to refuse to have their specific image captured. In the context of the camino, capturing an image of the Prazo Obradoiro or the arch leading into it with people streaming though would be an example where even a 'no photography' symbol would be meaningless, in my view.

your rights of deciding what happens with your own likeness are yours to decide.

It would be interesting to see how far this has moved. It certainly has been clear for some time that this applies for commercial use of images, although I know of at least one case in Australia where the individual was unable to prevent use of his image in an advertising campaign. The other great game-changer would be the internet, and the growth of applications that allow us to share almost anything with almost anyone. Most of that is done without any expectation of commercial reward on the part of the individuals who use these tools to publish their holiday snaps etc.

Then, as @SYates notes, there are the complications of whether someone is newsworthy, increasing restrictions in some country's anti-terrorist laws, etc. However, my basic take on this is that for individuals, capturing images of their Camino for non-commercial purposes in public places is perfectly legal, and cannot be prevented. That is not to suggest that one shouldn't be polite or to donate when capturing an image of a noteworthy individual where they are the principal subject of an image, nor does it mean that that individual has to perform, pose or otherwise behave in a way that continues to make the image attractive either. It is clearly their prerogative how to present themselves as it is the photographers prerogative to capture the image presented.

 

[november_moon]

Sure, he's playing for donations, but he's also in a public place, playing a musical instrument and bringing attention to himself in a spot where hundreds, if not thousands of people pass by everyday. It's not unreasonable that out of all those people, not all are going to tip you, and with the common presence of cameras these days, some are going to film you. Don't like that, then get a regular job that doesn't require interacting with the public. Otherwise suck it up, buttercup.

I completely agree. If you make your living by playing music on the street, you should be prepared to have your picture taken and to be filmed. It just comes with the territory.

 

[Mark Lee]

We are a wee bit more strong on that general rule in Europe, it is called 'right to your own likeness being captured' or 'right to your image being taken' in (hazy on the exact translation there). It boils down that in Europe that

Unless you are a figure of real political/social public interest, your rights of deciding what happens with your own likeness are yours to decide.
Meaning, even if you turn up in a medieval costume at a tourist site, the decision if somebody can take, no speaking of use, your likeness is still yours.

Complicated business, so I agree, better ask than be sorry for not asking.

Buen Camino, SY

Yeah, but none of that justifies a physical assault, which could have lead to a serious injury.
I'm confident that this was a pretty much isolated incident and the bagpiper in question is just an idiot with anger management issues.
I wouldn't let the fear of being assaulted prevent me from snapping a photo or two.

 

[Neoscan]

There is no such right in most countries around the world. If you are in a public place or can be seen from a public place, a photographer is perfectly entitled to capture your image as a photograph. Any individual's rights are associated with the publication of images for commercial reward, which in most cases is not permitted without an individual giving their explicit permission. The general exceptions are press photography for images considered 'newsworthy'. And I am aware that there are places where photography generally is banned near military installations and other public buildings, immigration halls at airports, ports and other border crossings, etc, etc.

This may be the case in 'most countries' but it is NOT the case in Spain where this incident took place. Spain has very strict laws regarding photography in all public spaces. It is illegal in most cases to actually take a photograph of somebody in public in Spain without their permission (although many performing musicians and performers obviously don't mind this happening in return for a donation). As stated above, regardless of what laws are in place in a particular country, it is just rude to take a photograph of anyone against their will, legal or not. And yes, the law does get very complicated regarding this everywhere which is the reason most countries have the 'okay in public etc' rule- policing photographs being taken in public is very difficult in this day and age (or any). I wouldn't generally worry too much about it.

While I don't condone violence, if this musician 'stopped playing and turned his back' it should be fairly obvious to anyone that he didn't want his photograph taken. Why push things any further?? Whether you agree or not though, at the end of the day it is this piper's prerogative if he wants to let anyone take his photograph or not, no matter how strange his behaviour may seem to most of us.

In a busy place like Santiago I do agree it seems a little over-the-top for a street musician not to let people take a photograph of them, especially since many of those taking a photograph would probably donate afterwards (well, you would hope so at least!). Maybe someone should let him in on this fact?

Maybe he was just tired of feeling like a monkey in a zoo? Having cameras pointed at you all day does strange things to some people (again, I'm not condoning his violent actions here at all and glad he has been charged, just merely wondering what causes him to (re)act in this way to pilgrims/tourists).

 

[Icacos]

We don't know if he makes his living by playing music on the streets. Perhaps he just likes to play music, is grateful for whatever donativo he receives, but just doesn't want his picture taken. Turning one's back to the camera is, to me, a pretty clear indication that a person does not want his picture taken and I would be inclined to respect that. Perhaps assaulting someone for questioning that behaviour may indicate some anger management issues, or perhaps the bagpipe player is just not of sound mind. Either way, I don't think we should judge him. Pilgrims of all sorts are allowed to walk the Camino, and we try not to judge them. We might give the same latitude to music makers in Santiago.

 

[Mark Lee]

We don't know if he makes his living by playing music on the streets. Perhaps he just likes to play music, is grateful for whatever donativo he receives, but just doesn't want his picture taken. Turning one's back to the camera is, to me, a pretty clear indication that a person does not want his picture taken and I would be inclined to respect that. Perhaps assaulting someone for questioning that behaviour may indicate some anger management issues, or perhaps the bagpipe player is just not of sound mind. Either way, I don't think we should judge him. Pilgrims of all sorts are allowed to walk the Camino, and we try not to judge them. We might give the same latitude to music makers in Santiago.

ha ha....
Ain't no judging. He knocked the dude on his arse with a sucker punch to the jaw over a photograph. That's just unacceptable behavior.

 

[dougfitz]

Spain has very strict laws regarding photography in all public spaces. It is illegal in most cases to actually take a photograph of somebody in public in Spain without their permission (although many performing musicians and performers obviously don't mind this happening in return for a donation).

That is interesting. Can you point to the legal instruments that establish this? I ask because the only recent law that I am aware of that prohibits the taking of images is the restriction in the 2014 'Citizen Security Law' about still or motion photography of police. If the more general restriction had been established, it would seem unnecessary to have passed this 2014 law.

ps the European Court of Human Rights 2015 report on internet related case-law (here) makes it clear that it is generally publication that is the issue. I understand that in some cases, like taking images of children, there is a broader interpretation that includes a requirement to seek the parents permission, but I have not found any general restriction on taking images in public, nor a requirement to seek permission to do so.

 

[oursonpolaire]

I am having trouble finding an English-language translation of the Spanish civil code and so cannot quote chapter and verse, but generally speaking countries or jurisdictions under the (Napoleonic) civil code have clauses under the Persons chapter which establish persons' rights to their image and their presentation. This is the basis of the many anti-paparazzi lawsuits. Even so, if the piper had a complaint about the photo-taking, he should have sought the police-- violence against the photographer is not justifiable.

 

[Icacos]

ha ha....
Ain't no judging. He knocked the dude on his arse with a sucker punch to the jaw over a photograph. That's just unacceptable behavior.

Okay, Mark. I'll probably get into trouble for saying this, but some people will walk into a problem, instead of backtracking.

 

[Bajaracer]

I saw this same guy go off on somebody in late July 2013, so this is not an isolated incident.

 

[Anemone del Camino]

Aren't the musicians in that tunnel working based on specific times they are permitted to play? Don't think these are impromtu shows.

 

[Mark Lee]

Okay, Mark. I'll probably get into trouble for saying this, but some people will walk into a problem, instead of backtracking.

I fully understand that. I saw enough of silly shite like this when I was a copper. There are times when discretion is the better part of valor. I'd just prefer nobody has to witness brawls as they enter the plaza at the end of their Camino. What a crappy memory that would be.

 

[luvtraveling]

I saw this same guy in Oct. 2013. I stopped to take his picture and he turned his back. I had planned to give him some coins, but didn't want to miss the opportunity which sometimes happens if you wait. I happened to be soaking wet and couldn't dig out my change easily, so opted to take the picture first. I thought he was rude and decided not to take his picture after all. His loss, not mine!

 

[C clearly]

I don't think we should judge him.

Maybe not, but we can form a preliminary opinion, and then see what the judge says in court.

 

[november_moon]

Aren't the musicians in that tunnel working based on specific times they are permitted to play? Don't think these are impromtu shows.

That is correct. The musicians sign up for specific times.

 

[Neoscan]

I ask because the only recent law that I am aware of that prohibits the taking of images is the restriction in the 2014 'Citizen Security Law' about still or motion photography of police. If the more general restriction had been established, it would seem unnecessary to have passed this 2014 law.

You could well be correct Doug and the article I read could well be incorrect. It mentioned Spain being one of the few countries where photography laws went much further than most and legally gave individuals more rights than in other countries. It mentioned the legalities of someone's image being taken in public by individuals, cctv cameras, google earth, etc. There was something about the Spanish constitution in it. I have also read various comments on photography forums mentioning it too. Article 18 of the Civil Law Act no. 1/1982 of 5 May 1982 on the Protection of the Right to Honour, Personal and Family Privacy and Own Image may have some relevance (or not).

 

[Neoscan]

More reports of this strange, back turning behaviour- I really want to see the guy in action now (the strange back turning, not the throwing punches).

 

[stewartza]

28 September. Hopefully, not this guy. He seemed real nice, and his pipes from the tunnel were like magic as we approached the Cathedral. There was someone else the next day ...View attachment 27612

No, this is not the same guy. Because of the court case I am aware of the identity of the person in question but I have not revealed it. He is a tall man who wears traditional dress.

 

[GettingThere]

Maybe not, but we can form a preliminary opinion, and then see what the judge says in court.

From re-reading the OP, it sounds as though the prosecution resulted in the man being found guilty - "was successful" - and that he has been fined and had to pay costs.

 

[Bogong]

You could well be correct Doug and the article I read could well be incorrect. It mentioned Spain being one of the few countries where photography laws went much further than most and legally gave individuals more rights than in other countries. It mentioned the legalities of someone's image being taken in public by individuals, cctv cameras, google earth, etc. There was something about the Spanish constitution in it. I have also read various comments on photography forums mentioning it too. Article 18 of the Civil Law Act no. 1/1982 of 5 May 1982 on the Protection of the Right to Honour, Personal and Family Privacy and Own Image may have some relevance (or not).

Interesting report in the Australian media today, Neoscan. Included:
" ...a legal and Spanish constitutional right to control the use of personal image."

I wanted to take a photo of the entry to the Praza using the tunnel as a frame( another feeble and unsuccessful attempt to elevate my photos above the "snapshot" category). He was in the way but he turned his back anyway. Perhaps I should have asked him to move? He may have taken a swing at me also, but I'd already flattened someone who tried to rob me in Carrion de los Condes so who knows what may have transpired?

Be that as it may, there's no excuse for reacting in this violent manner. BTW I did enjoy his playing. Later there were a youngish couple there singing operatic arias, and they were brilliant. We have their CD, and they were lovely people.

Incidentally there are countries to our north where it is regarded as highly offensive to take a person's photo in an everyday situation without seeking permission. Something to do with capturing their soul, I think.

Best in all cases where you specifically want a photo of a person, and they don't just happen to be an incidental part of a broader shot, to ask permission.

De Colores

Bogong

 

[Theatregal]

Agreed...
As I said, this guy was real nice and my wife (smiling) had just given him some coins. It was a wonderful part of our arrival in Santiago. Hopefully, the capturing of a happy moment of our journey doesn't offend anyone?

It is indeed a great photo of a happy memory but the context in which it was posted is in a thread which associates this musician with a violent crime. The words "hopefully, not this guy" implies the possibility that it could be.

 

[Kanga]

I have deleted photos from this thread. A photograph of a person with a slur attached is defamatory in many places where this forum is "published" (i.e. in many countries) - regardless of how or who took the photograph or whether the taking of the photo itself was lawful.

The administrator of this forum and moderators can be held accountable for things published, please exercise care and do not make damaging allegations about identified or easily identifiable individuals.

 

[peregrina2000]

I guess this thread has kind of beaten the topic to death, but I remember a big news story that illustrates the intercultural differences. When former Spanish prime minister Zapatero and his family were visiting the US, a picture of the Obamas and the Zapateros (and his goth daughters) was published by either the state dept or White House on the web. It caused an international kerfuffle because Zapatero had kept his daughters totally out of the press, as apparently is their right based on what some of you say.

 

[domigee]

I guess this thread has kind of beaten the topic to death, but I remember a big news story that illustrates the intercultural differences. When former Spanish prime minister Zapatero and his family were visiting the US, a picture of the Obamas and the Zapateros (and his goth daughters) was published by either the state dept or White House on the web. It caused an international kerfuffle because Zapatero had kept his daughters totally out of the press, as apparently is their right based on what some of you say.

I remember that! My Spanish friends were appalled! The French press never bothered to publish the pics so I knew nothing about it...

 

[domigee]

On the same subject, and apologies if it is boring.... I never took photos of people whilst walking to Jerusalem, I felt it was wrong somehow and now I wish I could have.... Difficult to describe things to people without pics.
But I could never have asked permission of everyone (in a market place for instance) so I refrained.
Now people think I just exaggerate but it is all in my memory

 

[SYates]

..., a picture of the Obamas and the Zapateros (and his goth daughters) was published by either the state dept or White House on the web. It caused an international kerfuffle because Zapatero had kept his daughters totally out of the press, as apparently is their right based on what some of you say.

Not only his right, but also very wise considering they might be a target for being his daughters. SY

 

[CaminoDebrita]

Ah, the many comments, interpretations, examples! I love it.

A side comment that is not entirely extraneous to this discussion: I remember when not so long ago, we were discussing the technique of photographing "flashers" in Spain, and many spoke up and insisted that the flasher had rights to NOT be captured on film (or digital media, as it were).

Guess those photographing a famous flasher would be safe (e.g.., "oh, sorry--I mistook you for Roman Polanski"!)

 

[stevenjarvis]

Do unto others .... Very sad for all concerned, especially the victim of the attack and the OP Stewart , but including the piper, who clearly had problems before the event, which have undoubtedly deepened since. I hope all concerned can make a swift recovery, and that the charming ethereal pipe music continues to echo around the cathedral.

 

[purplesage]

Last week I walked into Santiago with a Spanish man whom I had met whilst walking. As we approached the steps to go down to the Praza de Obradoiro in front of the cathedral we heard and saw a man dressed traditionally playing the bagpipes. My friend said he would like to take a photo of him. The bagpipe player stopped playing and turned his back to my friend. When my friend asked him why, the bagpipe player became aggressive, swore at my friend and knocked him to the ground with a vicious punch to the jaw.
We went immediately to the police and laid a charge of assault which, when it went to court was successful.
The police had urged my friend to lay the charge as this bagpipe player was well known as being aggressive to pilgrims, none of whom had ever laid a charge, therefore the police were powerless to act against him.
Besides receiving a fine and having to pay the costs of the court this man's name is now on the penal register as a vicious, aggressive person. Should he act in such a way again the police will now be able to act promptly against him.
Be wary of him if you come across him.

I'm saddened and shocked !! Violence in OUR city? I have a rough up with the security in the Cathedral when I was there in February, because I got very emotional and cried ALOUD. They asked me to leave and at the door, said I shouldn't go back there....... and I didn't. I stayed in Santiago for 3 months after this incident and went to service at the Franciscan Monestry which was very gratifying. Its sad that pilgrims are sometimes treated badly, but I take everything in my STRIDE. Sometimes people (tourist sort) ask if they can take a photo of me and if I feel good, I might agree. But not always. I had a great time in Santiago, the pilgrims' house folks were amazing (((oops... haven't thanked them ... yet))) and made some great great friends. Its all happening..... Buen Camino , Caesar

 

[GRR]

I am a busker; that is I play music on the streets. I do this freely and if people enjoy what I am doing, if they smile as they pass or stop and listen I am happy. If they leave a tip so much the better. I am giving freely and they are giving freely. There is a spiritual exchange going on whether they smile or tip. Taking my picture without consideration in return is something that goes beyond this exchange. I feel insulted, as if I were no more than a decoration, an animal in a zoo. I tolerate it, as part of the price that one must pay to do what one must do. It happens.

I saw this bagpipe player at the cathedral. And yes he did turn his back on photographers that tried to snap his picture as they passed without throwing down a euro or two. I understood what he was doing and why. In turning his back he is telling you "hey, this is not part of the deal." I also understand why he became violent when challenged. He deals with hundreds, maybe thousands of people every day who are ignorant and want to take and not give. To challenge his decision is an affront. For the music, a genuine smile is enough. For a photograph, you are overstepping the boundaries if you do not first indicate your appreciation by tipping the performer.

When you encounter a busker that is charming enough to elicit your desire to photograph or even video, tip first. You won't have a problem. Take this as a general rule wherever you go in the world.

 

[Pong]

I am a busker; that is I play music on the streets. I do this freely and if people enjoy what I am doing, if they smile as they pass or stop and listen I am happy. If they leave a tip so much the better. I am giving freely and they are giving freely. There is a spiritual exchange going on whether they smile or tip. Taking my picture without consideration in return is something that goes beyond this exchange. I feel insulted, as if I were no more than a decoration, an animal in a zoo. I tolerate it, as part of the price that one must pay to do what one must do. It happens.

I saw this bagpipe player at the cathedral. And yes he did turn his back on photographers that tried to snap his picture as they passed without throwing down a euro or two. I understood what he was doing and why. In turning his back he is telling you "hey, this is not part of the deal." I also understand why he became violent when challenged. He deals with hundreds, maybe thousands of people every day who are ignorant and want to take and not give. To challenge his decision is an affront. For the music, a genuine smile is enough. For a photograph, you are overstepping the boundaries if you do not first indicate your appreciation by tipping the performer.

When you encounter a busker that is charming enough to elicit your desire to photograph or even video, tip first. You won't have a problem. Take this as a general rule wherever you go in the world.

You "can understand why he became violent when challenged" because he deals with hundreds maybe thousands of people who are ignorant.... Is that an excuse for a physical attack on someone? I am not a busker, but it does not seem unreasonable that such a person would know that they will need to deal with hundreds, maybe thousands of ignorant people. I expect it's an occupational hazard. That bagpiper should find a more refined venue than the street if he is so easily affronted and cannot contain his anger. I'm surprised he is allowed to continue.

 

[Albertagirl]

There is some kind of cultural disconnect here that I do not understand. I took almost no photos of people on the camino, only of walking companions with their consent. I was tempted to anger on one occasion when a pilgrim passing me took my photo as I sat in front of a small chapel praying my morning prayers. He was English-speaking and clearly this was a normal thing for him to take a photo. I do not like having my photo taken, and clearly many persons on camino consider that it is socially permissible for them to do so. @GRR as a busker considers that his music is free, paid for with a smile, or a coin, if offered, but his photo is not. I do not understand this either. There was something uncomfortable for me about the underpass at the Cathedral in Santiago, where buskers play. I never went through there, although I stayed at San Martin Pinario for six days and frequently had to detour to avoid the underpass. Maybe a public underpass felt insecure for me, as a solitary female. It certainly feels so now, with a violent busker present there. I recall being in northern Kenya some years ago and having a local young man in traditional attire offering to have his photo taken for a contribution. He did not know how to respond when I said that I did not have a camera.
As a visitor in Spain, I consider it my duty to try to understand and comply with local law and custom. I am grateful for this thread, as it helps me to focus my lack of understanding and to remind myself to learn respect and comply with local custom.

 

[SYates]

@Pong To understand can also/simply mean just to emphasise with someone WITHOUT agreeing with their actions. Buen Camino, SY

 

[grayland]

This discussion has covered both sides of the issue and it may be time to close it before any stronger animosity occurs.