Re: [videoblogging] Re: Shooting In Public
JD Lasica: ...these articles may be of interest... Nice call, JD, thanks! Although perhaps I should point out (just so all remain on the same page) the issues discussed in this thread were specific to the Graber matter, as shooting on public lands pose other elements as well. Maybe in the future we can discuss public film permits (on federal state lands -- when they are need and not); location releases re pubic lands, dealing with land managers, on-the-fly releases and other relevant topics. That is of course if the group is open to such. Happy Trails, Mark Villaseñor, http://www.TailTrex.tv Canine Adventures For Charity - sm http://www.SOAR508.org
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Shooting In Public
Gena: You certainly do not want police officers interpreting their own understanding of the law. Which is precisely why I brought this to the groups' attention, considering our collective interest (video, often shot in public places). When folks are aware of their prevailing rights, there is no need for concern about how law enforcement interprets. After all, an informed populace thwart tyrants and scoundrels. Mark Villaseñor, http://www.TailTrex.tv Canine Adventures For Charity - sm http://www.SOAR508.org
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Shooting In Public
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Mark Villaseñor videoblogyahoogr...@tailtrex.tv wrote: Gena: You certainly do not want police officers interpreting their own understanding of the law. Which is precisely why I brought this to the groups' attention, considering our collective interest (video, often shot in public places). When folks are aware of their prevailing rights, there is no need for concern about how law enforcement interprets. After all, an informed populace thwart tyrants and scoundrels. How did Bush Jr get away with everything then? :- Dave.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Shooting In Public
not sure why a conversation between an officer of the state and a citizen would be deemed private. But hey, I'm on the other side of the planet an appropriate closing Adrian Miles School of Media and Communication Program Director B.Comm Honours vogmae.net.au On 9 June 2010 13:50, compumavengal compumaven...@earthlink.net wrote: a person may not willfully intercept what it calls oral communications. It defines oral communications as any conversation or words spoken to or by any person in private conversation. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
