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

Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video off YouTube

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 326 posts

Re: Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video off YouTube

#151

Post by squeaky-clean »

slowmovintarget wrote: post #118
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #35

Very upsetting the mindset of a police officer (sergeant!) who will harass someone while listening to a pre trial hearing for an officer who murdered a man having a mental breakdown, and then upon being recorded will attempt to interfere with that recording. Police officers are given extraordinary powers by society and yet they can act like spoiled brats (or worse). Not cool!

Why aren't you upset about YouTube allowing automated removal of videos with zero reconciliation to fair use statutes? It's YouTube and Instagram that are broken. The right to record is preserved. The ability (not right) to distribute is hampered by these organizations.

It's copyright law that's broken. Youtube and etc are just an ugly stack of mismatched patterned band-aids covering a large infected wound that really needs antibiotics and not just bandaids.

Re: Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video off YouTube

#152

Post by 015a »

moate wrote: post #31
015a wrote: post #20

To some degree I understand the cop's position. The internet is an insanely dangerous echo chamber. The vast, VAST majority of police interactions are not that. The vast majority of police interactions are well-meaning officers maintaining public order. This doesn't excuse the interactions which are unrighteous and deserve to be exposed, possibly including the interaction that these people were protesting. The office…

Bad take is bad. It's not the cop's job to do prevent this video from getting onto YoutTube. We have a whole SLEW of legislative channels that could be used to "protect" cops from people recording them. Don't want videos of cops being posted on the internet? Contact your local representative and have them sponsor a law. Also, in an environment in which trust with the police has been eroded to the point of rioting bec…

No one is suggesting that recording the police should be disallowed. I'd argue its a critically important piece of balance between the police and citizens; at worst, it can tell a different angle of the same story, and at best it can fight against corruption which does exist (e.g. not wearing body cams, lying, computer glitch lost the bodycam footage, etc).

The line is drawn where that footage is distributed and used. Unfortunately, that's less a line, and more of a hazy, impossible to legislate boundary.

A courtroom is, undeniably, the best place. This is where this footage should be used; as one piece of evidence in a very long-term narrative about what happened and who is at fault.

A neutral site whose entire purpose is to document encounters with the police in an almost database-like format? Maybe there too. Transparency does matter. Dissemination can matter, especially in instances of extreme police brutality or corruption, which does happen (especially outside developed nations).

YouTube? Facebook? Twitter? No. Stop making YouTube the single place for all internet video. Stop letting the algorithm make you angry. It won't do it for you. It will surface videos which make you angry. You share those videos. Like a virus, the outrage spreads. What's the plan? Be angry? Tear the system down, or let it tear you down? Defund the police? Get him fired? So, Destruction in any form? All that matters is revenge disguised in a veil of "making the world better", but destruction never ends this way.

You believe you can escalate tension because "the police can take it". Its still escalation, and they can take it. Do you want every encounter with a police officer to mean War? Do you enjoy the fact that officers approach cars pulled over for speeding with their hands on their weapon? Do you think this policy actually makes the world safer, or is it self-defense in an unsafe world that actually increases the probability of a negative outcome for citizens? A scale with one pound on each side is balanced; a scale with a hundred pounds on each side breaks.

Re: Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video off YouTube

#153

Post by TaylorAlexander »

slowmovintarget wrote: post #118
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #35

Very upsetting the mindset of a police officer (sergeant!) who will harass someone while listening to a pre trial hearing for an officer who murdered a man having a mental breakdown, and then upon being recorded will attempt to interfere with that recording. Police officers are given extraordinary powers by society and yet they can act like spoiled brats (or worse). Not cool!

Why aren't you upset about YouTube allowing automated removal of videos with zero reconciliation to fair use statutes? It's YouTube and Instagram that are broken. The right to record is preserved. The ability (not right) to distribute is hampered by these organizations.

I mean, I do take issue with that. But police officers behaving inappropriately is a MUCH larger problem, and so the focus on my concern.

Re: Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video off YouTube

#154

Post by elliekelly »

dctoedt wrote: post #91
marsdepinski wrote: post #63

Isn't that public performance and doesn't that require the police dept to pay royalties?

> Isn't that public performance and doesn't that require the police dept to pay royalties? Yes, but under current law, states can ignore the royalty requirement with impunity: "[C]opyright owners suffering infringement by state entities cannot seek the remedies provided by the Copyright Act." [0] Police departments are almost certain to be held to be state entities, I'd think, and therefore immune from individual per…

I know the purpose of this is really to avoid the clip going viral but I’m curious whether there have been any cases addressing whether this situation could fall under fair use with respect to the person recording? Videos like this are usually newsworthy (and not made for commercial purposes) and the copyrighted material is incidental to the purpose of the recording.

I suppose I’m wondering whether this is an actual potential legal issue for the people making/posting these videos or whether the only issue is the headache of YouTube’s takedown process? If someone posts a video like this how likely is it they’ve infringed on someone else’s copyright? Being careful not solicit legal advice maybe a better question is, what factors would be relevant to weighing whether or not the video infringes on the copyright?

I guess it’s difficult for me to wrap my head around how there could be infringement without the (intentional?) misappropriation of the work.

Re: Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video off YouTube

#155

Post by DevKoala »

heavyset_go wrote: post #68
DevKoala wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think so because the officer isn’t posting the video online. Unless you think it violates copyright to play music in public spaces.

You need a license to play or perform music and other types of copyrighted media in public.

Is this true? I play music on the street sometimes. Am I violating the law?

Seriously concerned. Not that I want to defend the cop (o haven’t watched the video), but I feel that if we start enforcing these restrictions we are going to get ourselves into a rabbit hole of no fun.

Re: Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video off YouTube

#156

Post by nitrogen »

a9entroy wrote: post #147
slowmovintarget wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why aren't you upset about YouTube allowing automated removal of videos with zero reconciliation to fair use statutes? It's YouTube and Instagram that are broken. The right to record is preserved. The ability (not right) to distribute is hampered by these organizations.

Because YouTube is doing it at the behest of the public. People voted in representatives that brought laws that force YouTube to do this. Your outrage is misplaced. You think YouTube has any incentive in this? If it were up to YouTube they would just bring in rules that give creators ample flexibility while still making sure there's no infringement.

Laws don't force YouTube to preemptively detect and demonetize or remove anything. They chose to do that.

Re: Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video off YouTube

#158

Post by ballenf »

darkwater wrote: post #133
slowmovintarget wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why aren't you upset about YouTube allowing automated removal of videos with zero reconciliation to fair use statutes? It's YouTube and Instagram that are broken. The right to record is preserved. The ability (not right) to distribute is hampered by these organizations.

Because YT automated removal of copyrighted content here is just the loophole used by the police officer to avoid being recorded and published (which it's a citizen right in the US, according to the article). So it's the sergeant attitude the problem here, he would use another loophole if this one wasn't available. Why are you trying to diverge the attention spot here?

I think both are fair readings here.

There's even a strong case for a third problem: copyright itself is a tool fundamentally one-sided and OP.

Three different things can all be true at the same time without detracting from each other.

The problem with focusing on just the police here is that there are any number of circumstances where copyrighted audio will be naturally occurring that the issue will require more than just getting the police to refrain from using the loophole.

Re: Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video off YouTube

#159

Post by chipotle_coyote »

robbrown451 wrote: post #83
pseudalopex wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't play it for himself.

He played it in the normal way you play music, where others can hear it. He isn't responsible for the fact that it is being filmed and shown more widely. That said, he should be fired for reasons that have nothing to do with copyright. It is an obnoxious attempt to avoid accountability.

> He isn't responsible for the fact that it is being filmed and shown more widely.

IANAL, but I think this would be a tenuous claim. If I see you with a camera and do something while you are pointing the camera at me -- with the express stated intent of having you film me doing it, no less -- I don't think I would get to (credibly) claim "hey, not my responsibility, I just happened to be doing that thing and you happened to catch me doing it on camera."

Re: Police officer plays Taylor Swift song to keep a video off YouTube

#160

Post by lancesells »

slowmovintarget wrote: post #118
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #35

Very upsetting the mindset of a police officer (sergeant!) who will harass someone while listening to a pre trial hearing for an officer who murdered a man having a mental breakdown, and then upon being recorded will attempt to interfere with that recording. Police officers are given extraordinary powers by society and yet they can act like spoiled brats (or worse). Not cool!

Why aren't you upset about YouTube allowing automated removal of videos with zero reconciliation to fair use statutes? It's YouTube and Instagram that are broken. The right to record is preserved. The ability (not right) to distribute is hampered by these organizations.

I think you're reaching a little here. There are many, many things wrong with YouTube but just because someone found a hack on attempting to stop things from going viral doesn't mean they are really to blame here.

Also, YouTube is not the internet or the world's preservation archive of video. It's a massive tv station from a massive ad company. I can't imagine there won't be a time where YouTube doesn't start deleting videos that are uploaded to their service just because they are taking up storage. So let's not give YouTube that power.

Post reply on HN