Conversation

Notices

1. Shadowman311 (shadowman311@poa.st)'s status on Saturday, 01-Apr-2023 19:02:45 JST Shadowman311
   A few days ago I posted a story about a rapper getting sued for using footage of the cops raiding his house for his music video, I just found the video and it's pretty funny and humiliates police officers.
   
   youtu.be/oponIfu5L3Y
   • Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: (thatguyoverthere@shitposter.club)'s status on Saturday, 01-Apr-2023 19:02:44 JST Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think:

     in reply to
     @Shadowman311 I love Afroman. You remember "because I got high"
     
     How are they able to sue. It seems like all the footage is on his property
   • Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: (thatguyoverthere@shitposter.club)'s status on Saturday, 01-Apr-2023 19:11:27 JST Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think:

     in reply to

     • 🐘🐘 Humpleupagus 🐘🐘
     • verified neko :verified::verified::verified::makemeneko:
     @roboneko @Shadowman311 I think in public it depends on the state (1 party vs 2 party consent), but you would think on private property it would be different. maybe @Humpleupagus would have a better idea.
   • verified neko :verified::verified::verified::makemeneko: (roboneko@bae.st)'s status on Saturday, 01-Apr-2023 19:11:28 JST verified neko :verified::verified::verified::makemeneko:

     in reply to

     • Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think:
     @thatguyoverthere @Shadowman311 I don't even think it being on his property is relevant. SCOTUS has been clear that police carrying out their duties can be video and audio recorded. effectively that police who are carrying out official duties have no expectation of privacy. so it seems equivalent to using footage taken in a public place
     
     ... could you be sued for using footage taken on a public street in a commercial manner? I thought that was ok but I don't actually know
     Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: likes this.
   • verified neko :verified::verified::verified::makemeneko: (roboneko@bae.st)'s status on Saturday, 01-Apr-2023 19:27:16 JST verified neko :verified::verified::verified::makemeneko:

     in reply to

     • 🐘🐘 Humpleupagus 🐘🐘
     • Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think:
     @thatguyoverthere @Humpleupagus @Shadowman311
     
     > 1 party vs 2 party consent
     
     I'm pretty sure you're always allowed to record police officers carrying out official duties regardless of state wiretapping laws and etc. as in SCOTUS said "that is always ok to do get wrekt legislature"
     
     but what I meant was, assuming you have a recording of a public place that didn't violate any laws when you took it. I just sort of assumed you could use it commercially but maybe that's not the case?
     Disinformation Purveyor :verified_think: likes this.