Live data from Hacker News

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

theverge.com

41–50 of 326 posts

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

#41

Isn't that video evidence that the police officer is violating the copyright?

I really have no clue. Playing music in public isn't considered copyright violation. Otherwise playing the radio would be unlawful. Edit: Wow, it really is considered unlawful. I reflexively hate the idea that playing a song can be considered violating copyright. Yes, I know there's more to it than just that, but wow.

If you're intentionally playing other peoples' recorded music for the public, then ASCAP and BMI are going to want their money.

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

#42
> keep video off YouTube

That, and it also trips up algorithms that scan live feeds (e.g. Facebook Live, Instagram Live) to make live streaming the encounter more difficult.

(citation: my virtual fitness instructor who gets booted off of Facebook Live mid-workout when certain songs are playing)

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

#43

Isn't that video evidence that the police officer is violating the copyright?

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.

> Unless you think it violates copyright to play music in public spaces.

Generally, yes:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106

---begin quote---

17 U.S. Code § 106 - Exclusive rights in copyrighted works

Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:

(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;

(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;

(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;

(4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly;

(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and

(6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.

---end quote---

There are some exceptions to this regarding specific permitted performances at 17 USC § 110 as well as the general exception to copyright in fair use at 17 USC § 107, but I don’t see an obvious argument that these or any other copyright exceptions apply to this use for this purpose. (I can see an argument that the police use would render the recording and reuse by the person recording the officer fair use, but that's not an issue here, because we already know that copyright protection schemes by platforms are hostile to fair use.)

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

#44
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…

I think it’s a little misguided to praise the officer for allowing them to film. It would be illegal for him to prevent them from filming him performing his duties in a public place. I also find it slightly ridiculous for you to characterize citizens recording their interactions with police for their own protection as a “citizen surveillance state.” The citizens are not the state. The police here are representatives of the state and must be held to account in every interaction with civilians. I don’t deny that it’s a high-pressure situation for an individual to be in, and like you I find it hard to personally fault him for his strategy to prevent going viral. AFAIK it’s legally fine, and ethically grey depending on his exact intentions, which we can’t really know. In this case however, it’s more likely to result in a Streisand effect.

Edit: on reading the rest of this thread I’m more convinced of the dubious legality of the cop’s playing music with the expectation that the recording will be made public

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

#45

That's pretty clever, they know that an individual with a video can be dealt with a lot easier than a viral video where the whole public gets to see the behavior. I'm glad some precincts burned down last summer. I'm glad a bunch of cops quit, and the ones remaining are all on edge, maybe negative reinforcement works on them too xD

>"I'm glad some precincts burned down last summer. I'm glad a bunch of cops quit, and the ones remaining are all on edge, maybe negative reinforcement works on them too xD" Be careful what you wish for..... Edit: You may hate the cops, but do you really think that mobs will be more accountable than the police?

I don't follow; what need the gp be careful of?

(I do see the post is now flagged but presume that's users disagreeing & abusing the flag button as it's within guidelines; I see what users may disagree with but still don't see what they should be "careful" about)

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

#46
post #31
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…

> Don't want videos of cops being posted on the internet? Contact your local representative and have them sponsor a law.

What would a law look like that would prevent people from posting videos of police officers on the internet while also complying with the First Amendment?

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

#47
post #7

Isn't that video evidence that the police officer is violating the copyright?

This would constitute a public performance of a song, I doubt he paid for a license.

He's certainly wearing the uniform, on the job and using the music for work purposes in a deliberate way. Sounds feasible as a public performance but I'd prefer a legal type's opinion.

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

#48
post #46
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Don't want videos of cops being posted on the internet? Contact your local representative and have them sponsor a law. What would a law look like that would prevent people from posting videos of police officers on the internet while also complying with the First Amendment?

It wouldn't. It's impossible. People want unconstitutional things all the time though, and sometimes they even make them into laws. Then they go to the SCOTUS and lose.

But you can do it.

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

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"I'm glad some precincts burned down last summer. I'm glad a bunch of cops quit, and the ones remaining are all on edge, maybe negative reinforcement works on them too xD" Be careful what you wish for..... Edit: You may hate the cops, but do you really think that mobs will be more accountable than the police?

I don't follow; what need the gp be careful of? (I do see the post is now flagged but presume that's users disagreeing & abusing the flag button as it's within guidelines; I see what users may disagree with but still don't see what they should be "careful" about)

I copied/quoted the part from the GP that stood out to me. I was just gobsmacked that the GP was glad precincts were burned down. I'm weary of mob and vigilante "justice".

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

#50

Perhaps a work around would be to post without audio and add text captions, fully accepting that if the people in the video are wearing masks, the captions could turn into bad lipreading memes.

Given the tools available now to do speech replacement/ deepfakes / etc. I wonder is there anything open-source available for song-replacement.

This is actually a problem I've seen on multiple (more innocuous) occasions: so-called "content-creator" youtubers casually mentioning that they had to throw away clips or rerecord sections during editing after realising there was copyrighted background noise. So I'd say there's definitely a market.

Post reply on HN