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

121–130 of 256 posts

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

#121

Post by monocasa »

mc32 wrote: post #112
monocasa wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I don’t think the cruiser is subject to your elevated standards. This is a classic case of double standards. We want one set of standards god people we agree with and another set of standards for people we disagree with. To avoid this, we institute a standard across the board for everyone, like them or dislike them.

Your entire premise was on what could be heard outside the cruiser.

And yes, it's fundamentally OK to hold police to a higher standard than the general public, including literal children. I'm not sure why this is in question.

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

#122

Post by exporectomy »

blt wrote: post #53

Anyone suggesting that this tactic can be stopped with copyright law is hilariously missing the point. The cops will just find a pro-cop artist and record label to play. The problem here is much deeper.

The problem is YouTube celebrities being dicks for likes. The cops are clearly just annoyed at this guy who keeps trying to wind them up to video their reaction. He's not filming them potentially beating anyone up, they're just standing there while he complains about random drivers going past who they're not stopping. Just because the victim is a cop doesn't mean the bully isn't wrong. If he was honestly trying to record police abuse, he could do it better keeping his mouth shut and from a distance without constantly trying to draw them into a stupid argument.

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

#123

Post by retrac »

justaguy88 wrote: post #106
burkaman wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The copyright holder could sue, which is rarely the artist. In this case it would be Sony.

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

#124

Post by phjesusthatguy3 »

On the one hand: neat hack!

On the other hand: let's go kill some cops

EDIT let me put it this way: when cops in my jurisdiction start murdering people I consider mine, I will gladly join my local dumb-ass militia to overthrow the government. As things are, members of my local dumb-ass militias are on trial for plotting the murder of the governor of my state for having the temerity to tell people they should attempt to stop infecting their fellow citizens with a virus that could kill them.

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

#125

Post by toiletfuneral »

sevenf0ur wrote: post #22

In all these videos, I see entitled live streamers who think it's the duty of the police to answer every silly question they ask. Borderline harassment. Playing copyrighted music doesn't prevent you from recording but it does get the annoying streamers to bugger off so mission accomplished.

you sound like a massive bootlicker

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

#126

Post by toomim »

RIMR wrote: post #65
matthewdgreen wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that the law is not all that capable of distinguishing this. It requires making a determination of intent, which is always blurry. Moreover, police officers will almost certainly claim that they were listening to music for personal reasons rather than trying to intimidate constitutionally protected filming -- and the courts will give them enormous amounts of deference because of their position.

So the issue is that police will regularly and maliciously lie and nobody will ever hold them responsible for doing so.

The issue is that you are pretending you can read police officers' minds and know their intent. And then you claim it's the worst possible intent.

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

#129

Post by jschwartzi »

sevenf0ur wrote: post #116
jschwartzi wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's disingenuous to say we, as the public, have no interest in what the police do while discharging their duties. It is a public office, after all. And I think the activities of the police should be scrutinized heavily because they have an incredible amount of power and are accorded a very wide latitude. The police are the only people who can legally shoot you and not be tried. They can arrest you and throw you in j…

A cop playing a Beatles song in the background does not prevent you from recording. These live streamers are not recording the police to hold them accountable. They antagonize officers who can't do anything about it, then upload that interaction online for monetization.

If that's the case, the cop can arrest them for harassment and use the video as evidence.

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

#130

Post by rib3ye »

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.

Can the state actually prosecute copyright infringement? I thought the suit needs to be brought forward by a private plaintiff .
Post reply on HN