
Court Decision on Recording Police Erodes First Amendment – Inviting Violence - _nh_
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/decision-eroding-first-amendments-rights-civil-rights-transparency-inviting-violence
======
cm2187
Isn't the police recording itself increasingly? In jurisdiction where it is
the case, surely there would be no reason to ban third party recording?

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
Lots of police cameras fail in all sorts of mysterious ways.

------
awinter-py
Hmm; but most streets in major city centers already have some kind of video
surveillance. Does that mean street-facing cameras are now criminal if a cop
walks past? Under eavesdropping case law, you can record anywhere there's no
expectation of privacy (this may vary by state).

ADA challenge -- what if I'm blind and using an assistive device that uses
video?

If this precedent stands (it won't, the 3rd district is dumb but not this
dumb) it will be a let them eat cake moment. Any form of civil disobedience
that involves videoing something with your cellphone will catch on like
wildfire.

Though the EFF's argument that there is no distinction between publishing and
its antecedents (i.e. photography) is bogus. The go-to case for where art
becomes harm is child porn. Not prohibited to videotape your young kids in the
bath, not okay to sell the photos to perverts.

