David Jones: “Even if you know your rights, they can still take you for a
ride on the legal merry-go-round. Those who have the power will always abuse
it.”
The former being true enough, only the repercussions for abuse of authority
under color of law pursuant to U.S. federal code (and many
Richard Amirault: Well, I'm no lawyer .. but I do know that the law is (can
be) different in various places unless superceded by federal law.
But the topic entails outside, Richard, events in public settings. Thus your
reliance upon case law such as JEAN are disconnected. The interior of a
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Mark Villaseñor
videoblogyahoogr...@tailtrex.tv wrote:
David Jones: “Even if you know your rights, they can still take you for a
ride on the legal merry-go-round. Those who have the power will always abuse
it.”
The former being true enough, only the
- Original Message -
From: Mark Villaseñor
Richard Amirault: If this `helmet cam' incident happened in Massachusetts
it would seem that it would be a violation.
Under the same fact pattern, no it would not.
Graber's video recording was not surreptitious, done with sinister motive,
David Jones: “I said or implied no such thing.”
Yeah, you did, Dave. You relied upon content from an article which suggested
as much that I targeted; hence the implications I pointed out.
David Jones: “I just wrote a little spiel, but seeing as this seems to be a
real pet hobby horse of yours
Richard Amirault: Sorry, a very good case can be made that the recording
*was* surreptitious. Yes, it was in plain sight. BUT was it obvious to the
officer that it was a recording device .. and, I think more importantly, was
it obvious that it was in record mode?
Not to be argumentative,
A good long group hug is usually the best answer.
Schlomo Rabinowitz
http://schlomo.tv
http://hatfactory.net
AIM:schlomochat
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Mark Villaseñor
videoblogyahoogr...@tailtrex.tv wrote:
David Jones: I said or implied no such thing.
Yeah, you did, Dave. You
Schlomo Rabinowitz: A good long group hug is usually the best answer.
Ok, ok, but no groping. :D
Mark Villaseñor,
http://www.TailTrex.tv
Canine Adventures For Charity - sm
http://www.SOAR508.org
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:08 AM, Mark Villaseñor
videoblogyahoogr...@tailtrex.tv wrote:
*snipped*
I won't take the bait.
David Jones: “Would still love to hear your story about how you make a
living online!”
I bet you would...
As would everyone else, I'm sure. I asked on behalf of the
David Jones: “My enthusiastic approach sometimes gets people off side, it
looks like you are one of them, that's too bad, sorry about that.”
No worries, and no offense taken whatsoever!
That said, let’s get something straight. I took issue with WHAT you’ve
stated, not with YOU as a person on
All:
Thought I might bring this up for discussion (the issue having recently made
national news), as some may not be fully aware of their rights while
shooting video in or on public lands and places. The ramifications of this
story are chilling, but not insurmountable if one knows their rights.
...@tailtrex.tv wrote:
From: Mark Villaseñor videoblogyahoogr...@tailtrex.tv
Subject: [videoblogging] Shooting In Public
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2010, 11:20 AM
All:
Thought I might bring this up for discussion
John Coffey: “I have a Contour HD helmet cam that I ride my bike with and do
sail my boat in Maryland. Will be extra careful.”
Hey John:
(LOVE the Contour, BTW. We’ll be replacing our VIO-POV’s with several
Contours in the near future.)
Actually, there is little to be “extra careful” about --
- Original Message -
From: Mark Villaseñor
(snip)
On March 5th of this year Anthony Graber drove his motorcycle recklessly,
until being pulled over by a Maryland State plainclothes policeman. Graber
wore a GoPro HD helmet-cam, recording his antics prior and after the
police
stop. He
Richard Amirault: Despite being in plain sight, and very obvious, how
`obvious' was it that it was in `record' mode? Unless he stated verbaly that
his conversation with the officer was being recorded (giving the officer the
chance to order him to stop recording) they may certainly have a valid
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 1:20 AM, Mark Villaseñor
videoblogyahoogr...@tailtrex.tv wrote:
All:
Thought I might bring this up for discussion (the issue having recently made
national news), as some may not be fully aware of their rights while
shooting video in or on public lands and places. The
- Original Message -
From: Mark Villaseñor
Howdy Richard:
Irrespective your critique of my prose (so sorry I confused you, my bad),
I
respectfully disagree. Please bear with me while I explain..?
18 USC §2510 and related parts define what wiretapping is and is not,
and
Graber's
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Richard Amirault ramira...@verizon.net wrote:
I remember a case (which I could not find on-line just now) where a man
recorded, with a visible audio cassette recorder, the police stopping him
for something or other. As far as I remember he was later convicted
I think the crazier bit are all those people who at some point sign releases
for this material. Or if in the airport shows there is some chance that they
don't have to if they get deported/have committed criminal offence and this
somehow suspends their rights (anyone know?) then am intrigued. If
19 matches
Mail list logo
