Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Multiple Beverly Hills PD officers now weaponizing copyright against streaming

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 256 posts

Re: Multiple Beverly Hills PD officers now weaponizing copyright against streaming

#101

Post by monkmartinez »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #76
sjg007 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably against policy to listen to music while on the beat and definitely when interacting with the public.

On the contrary, I wouldn’t be surprised if this was a de-escalation tactic for dealing with stalkers. If you watch the video (which is available in the previous article and all over social media, contrary to the narrative) it’s clear that the person is trying to get a rise out of the police officers by following them around and badgering them for content on his social media channels. He even went so far as to waterm…

I totally agree with you. There are lots of people that do this to EMS as well. Fortunately, I have HIPPA to get these people away from scenes. Unfortunately, there are a ton of people that have nothing better to do than film/jibe/harangue police and fire/EMS in the course of their duties. We know a lot of them on a first name basis including bday, medical history and how many times we have given them narcan... as we often find them with needles in their arms overdosed.

Re: Multiple Beverly Hills PD officers now weaponizing copyright against streaming

#102

Post by slowhand09 »

monocasa wrote: post #82
mc32 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmmm, I’d like to see this applied to many a teenager eager to have me listen to their choice of music for free from afar.

I hold police to a higher professional standard than I do lackadaisical teenagers.

How about criminals? Higher standards for them? Maybe that music they play while filming the knockout game, or stuff for Worldstar?

Re: Multiple Beverly Hills PD officers now weaponizing copyright against streaming

#103

Post by [deleted] »

acd wrote: post #5
ceejayoz wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting to me that the discussion appears focused on copyright issues, rather than what seems like a potential First Amendment violation by the police.

But people should have the right to work peace. It should also be a basic human right not to be constantly monitored.

[deleted]

Re: Multiple Beverly Hills PD officers now weaponizing copyright against streaming

#104

Post by jawns »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #62
jawns wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you propose some other legitimate purpose for their actions? I don't regularly see police officers playing music on their cell phones during the course of their official duties, nor do I see any reason why they should. Edit: To response to your edited comment, I don't think the problem with this conduct hinges on whether YouTube or other video-streaming services actually do flag them as copyright infringement and…

Seems like they’re trying to send a signal that they’re not interested in engaging in any more conversation. Feels like a de-escalation tactic. Whether you like them or not, these cops have people obsessively following them around, filming them, and trying to engage them for social media clout. I suspect if the filters had more of a legitimate purpose, we’d be hearing about it in these articles.

It feels like a de-escalation tactic? This is pretty classic passive-aggressive behavior. And aggressive behavior, whether in the form of overt aggression or passive-aggressive tactics, does not contribute to de-escalation.

Recording police in public as they perform their official duties is a constitutionally protected activity, upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, whose jurisdiction covers California. The police are trying to deter and prevent people from exercising that right.

The mature way to send a signal that they're not interested in engaging in conversation is to say, "I'm sorry, I'm not interested in engaging in any more conversation. I've got to attend to the duties of my job. It was nice talking with you."

I do acknowledge that police officers often face special scrutiny from the press and from the public. But that is because they are public servants with the ability to impinge upon people's life and liberty. And the more the public records LEO interactions, the more bad apples they seem to uncover.

Re: Multiple Beverly Hills PD officers now weaponizing copyright against streaming

#105

Post by renewiltord »

mc32 wrote: post #88
monocasa wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hold police to a higher professional standard than I do lackadaisical teenagers.

Both are playing music loudly and projecting it openly. Either it’s allowed for all or allowed for none. I’m good with either decision as long as it’s consistent.

I think that’s fair. So all you have to do is make it fair for everyone. We should allow the teenager to arrest the policeman.

Re: Multiple Beverly Hills PD officers now weaponizing copyright against streaming

#106

Post by justaguy88 »

burkaman wrote: post #99
tzs wrote: post #23

I wonder if the copyright owners could do something to stop the officers? What the officers are doing is probably a public performance and those generally requires permission of the copyright owner. There are some exceptions, such as for playing a radio or TV broadcast at businesses that are under certain sizes specified in square feet. I think the officers were probably playing recording from their phones or using a…

It is almost impossible to prosecute police for straightforward violent crimes, I don't think anybody is going to get them on copyright infringement.

It might be easier with copyright, since it wont rely on the local prosecutor to do anything, the artist can sue

Re: Multiple Beverly Hills PD officers now weaponizing copyright against streaming

#107

Post by monocasa »

slowhand09 wrote: post #102
monocasa wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hold police to a higher professional standard than I do lackadaisical teenagers.

How about criminals? Higher standards for them? Maybe that music they play while filming the knockout game, or stuff for Worldstar?

I'm not even sure what you're going off about.

But yes, I hold the police to higher standards of professional conduct than I do common criminals.

Re: Multiple Beverly Hills PD officers now weaponizing copyright against streaming

#108

Post by andrewflnr »

rootusrootus wrote: post #94
mc32 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both are playing music loudly and projecting it openly. Either it’s allowed for all or allowed for none. I’m good with either decision as long as it’s consistent.

My employer expects me to keep my music quiet (preferably confined to my ears only) when I am at the office. At home I can play it loud enough that the neighbors can hear it, and that's okay. I'm fine with professional officers being held to different standards when they are on duty.

As a potential neighbor: no, it's not ok. If I can hear your music, you are intruding in my space. I need at least one place on the planet where I can get some actual quiet without earplugs.

Re: Multiple Beverly Hills PD officers now weaponizing copyright against streaming

#109

Post by dragonwriter »

burkaman wrote: post #99
tzs wrote: post #23

I wonder if the copyright owners could do something to stop the officers? What the officers are doing is probably a public performance and those generally requires permission of the copyright owner. There are some exceptions, such as for playing a radio or TV broadcast at businesses that are under certain sizes specified in square feet. I think the officers were probably playing recording from their phones or using a…

It is almost impossible to prosecute police for straightforward violent crimes, I don't think anybody is going to get them on copyright infringement.

> It is almost impossible to prosecute police for straightforward violent crimes,

That's because criminal prosecution is limited to people who have a professional dependency on cooperation by LEOs.

Civil prosecution does not, and while individual officers may have qualified immunity, state/local government agencies, including police departments, have no legal privilege to disregard copyright.

Re: Multiple Beverly Hills PD officers now weaponizing copyright against streaming

#110

Post by monocasa »

mc32 wrote: post #97
rootusrootus wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My employer expects me to keep my music quiet (preferably confined to my ears only) when I am at the office. At home I can play it loud enough that the neighbors can hear it, and that's okay. I'm fine with professional officers being held to different standards when they are on duty.

What about a job site? Can they play loudly if the company or the foreman or forewoman allows it? Is it unprofessional if they play it loudly?

A jobsite has different and looser standards of professional conduct than what the police should be generally held to, yes.
Post reply on HN