Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional • Hacker News Board

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#31

Post by downandout » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 6:16 AM UTC

redial wrote: post #30

downandout wrote: post #28

Isn't trespassing, regardless of what you do once you are on private property without permission, already illegal? The video would just be evidence of the crime the person doing the filming committed by being there in the first place. It seems silly that there would need to be a separate law for this.

Some of them trespass, yes, but most of the filming is done from the outside using a powerful zoom lens, or from a drone, or more commonly, by an employee with access to the property.

Right, but what I was referring to was this:

The Utah Legislature approved a bill in 2012 that made it a class B misdemeanor to trespass on private livestock or poultry operations and record sound or images without the owner's permission.

So this particular law seems like a solution without a problem, given that trespassing for any reason is already illegal.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#32

Post by trhway » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 6:21 AM UTC

downandout wrote: post #28

Isn't trespassing, regardless of what you do once you are on private property without permission, already illegal? The video would just be evidence of the crime the person doing the filming committed by being there in the first place. It seems silly that there would need to be a separate law for this.

well, a violation of a minor law as a necessary step to stop bigger and much severe crime ... Or imagine somebody is having what looks like a heart attack and is falling onto a somebody's lawn, ie. private property, from the sidewalk - stepping onto the lawn to help would technically be the crime of trespassing, wouldn't it?

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#33

Post by westnortheast » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 6:29 AM UTC

This is great news for those that try to work to improve conditions for farm animals. Collecting this footage is already risky as it is (violent retribution is not unheard of), but remains a crucial tool in convincing people that factory farming (ie, more than ~95% of animal agriculture in the US) continues to treat animals brutally and inhumanely.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#34

Post by westnortheast » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 6:29 AM UTC

This is great news for those that try to work to improve conditions for farm animals. Collecting this footage is already risky as it is (violent retribution is not unheard of), but remains a crucial tool in convincing people that factory farming (ie, more than ~95% of animal agriculture in the US) continues to treat animals brutally and inhumanely.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#35

Post by spraak » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 6:35 AM UTC

burntrelish1273 wrote: post #3

Ag-gag laws are legitimized, crooked censorship. The meat processing industry is still extremely insulated, but let's hope this gets chipped away to reveal their secrets. This is one of the reasons undocumented immigrant labor is exploited: they generally won't say anything. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/21/us/meatpackers-profits-hin... http://www.meatpoultry.com/articles/news_home/Business/2013/... See also: SHowin…

Thanks for sharing, SHARK is amazing

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#36

Post by mercer » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 6:41 AM UTC

downandout wrote: post #31

redial wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of them trespass, yes, but most of the filming is done from the outside using a powerful zoom lens, or from a drone, or more commonly, by an employee with access to the property.

Right, but what I was referring to was this: The Utah Legislature approved a bill in 2012 that made it a class B misdemeanor to trespass on private livestock or poultry operations and record sound or images without the owner's permission. So this particular law seems like a solution without a problem, given that trespassing for any reason is already illegal.

If i understand correctly it's not that it wasn't illegal before, rather it wasn't a class B misdemeanor. I'm not a lawyer though.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#37

Post by downandout » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 6:45 AM UTC

trhway wrote: post #32

downandout wrote: post #28

Isn't trespassing, regardless of what you do once you are on private property without permission, already illegal? The video would just be evidence of the crime the person doing the filming committed by being there in the first place. It seems silly that there would need to be a separate law for this.

well, a violation of a minor law as a necessary step to stop bigger and much severe crime ... Or imagine somebody is having what looks like a heart attack and is falling onto a somebody's lawn, ie. private property, from the sidewalk - stepping onto the lawn to help would technically be the crime of trespassing, wouldn't it?

Actually, there are protections built into the our system of justice for incidental violations of the law like this where there was no criminal intent. Killing someone with your car is a potential violation of a whole host of serious statutes - potentially all the way up to first degree murder. But if it is determined to be an accident and there aren't other factors (intoxication, extreme negligence, etc.)...you cannot be prosecuted for that.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#38

Post by wtallis » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 6:51 AM UTC

bdcravens wrote: post #12

averagewall wrote: post #7

How is it ever legal to break into a business's property and secretly video the operations? You surely can't sneak into a factory and record their processes to sell to China. Is it only allowed when it's being used for protesting, not for stealing IP? Or only on farms but not in factories? What about trespass law? Non-disclosure agreements for employees? Are those invalid?

Presumably this just means that the filming isn't illegal; it doesn't mean actions taken to film are no longer subject to statutes. You can still be charged with trespassing, just not trespassing + filming.

The judge explained it thus:

>In short, the cases cited by the State answer the question of whether a landowner can remove someone from her property or sue for trespass even when the person wishes to exercise First Amendment rights. And generally, as the cases make clear, the answer is yes. But that is not the question before the court. The question here is whether the State (not a private landowner) can prosecute (not sue for damages) a person based on her speech on private property. [...]

> In sum, the fact that speech occurs on a private agricultural facility does not render it outside First Amendment protection. Nobody disputes that owners of an agricultural facility can immediately remove from the property any person speaking in ways the owners find objectionable. But if the State wants to criminalize the same speech, it must justify the law under the First Amendment.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#39

Post by wtallis » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 6:57 AM UTC

arthur_trudeau wrote: post #6

Reporting on legal decisions is garbage when it doesn't even include the name of the case, or better a pointer to the opinion, so I can read the ruling myself. But it seems tenuous to me to claim that the state can criminalize trespassing, but not trespassing for the purposes of X, or conspiring to trespass to commit X, regardless of X.

> "But it seems tenuous to me to claim that the state can criminalize trespassing, but not trespassing for the purposes of X, or conspiring to trespass to commit X, regardless of X."

In this case, X is speech protected by the First Amendment. The state cannot make "trespassing for the purposes of making legal speech" a worse crime than trespassing in general.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#40

Post by newscracker » Sat, Jul 08, 2017, 6:59 AM UTC

arthur_trudeau wrote: post #8

lighthazard wrote: post #5

Can anyone explain the justification for not recording? I can only see positive things come out of it.

Would you want someone secretly taking video of the most embarrassing, context-free 5 minutes they could find of your job, and invoking a mob to attack you on that basis? These environments, or disrupting their operations because you're trying to get a sweet shot, can be legitimately dangerous. Discouraging people from trespassing in search of publicity could certainly constitute a rational basis for such a law. It's…

People wouldn't be as upset if this were just "5 minutes" or just happening at one place. It's systemic and widespread, and for more people to know that it is indeed systemic and widespread, more investigation and exposés are required (even if the abusing parties don't like it). Otherwise people just brush it off saying "this is one isolated instance", "it's just two different places" and all sorts of excuses to avoid confronting the truth.