Big Brother
- Thread starter Bonzo Dog
- Start date
Help Support Valve Replacement Forums:
Not really snooping, it is an attempt by a private enterprise to enforce copyright laws. Although I don't agree with the judge in providing the information for those that viewed clips I do believe they should provide the information for those that posted it. Posting these clips is a form of theft. Now what you have to remember is that digital evidence such as that being provided is hearsay evidence and inadmissible in court on its own merits (meaning it can only be used in support of other evidence).
Ross
Well-known member
They'll never be happy until the "Govern" the internet too. 
For what it's worth--I helped write a book for the old West Publishing Company on evidence, and I am not sure that "digital evidence" is automatically considered hearsay. The traditional definition of hearsay is something like: "An out of court statement offered to prove the matter asserted in the statement'. For example, a newspaper headline asserting that the Red Sox beat the Yankees 5 to 4 offered in court to prove who won the game is hearsay because it is an out of court statement (not made under oath) offered to prove the matter asserted in the headline.
There are many circumstances under which hearsay evidence might be admissible, and this (newspaper article) is probably one of them. I don't believe there is an exception to the hearsay rule for evidence that is "supportive of other evidence".
Finally, for what it's worth-I think we are headed for a time when we will be forced to re-address many of these copy-write issues. I have concerns on both sides of the issue. In the past I have always made my photographs freely available. In recent months I have taken some that I am told may have (by my standards) significant commercial value. I am pondering how to protect them from being copied and perhaps greatly diminishing their market value.
On the other hand, the long term future for a law that is routinely violated (with no pangs of conscience) by millions of people is questionable. In the meantime, count me in with the group that is becoming increasingly concerned about government intrusion of our privacy. I don't have time for a long rant this morning, but we accept (perhaps because we don't know it's happening) access to our emails and other matters that we have never tolerated for the written word. I don't consider myself an alarmist, but I do consider this topic extremely serious. In my opinion it is time to wake up and get back to limiting government access to our private matters.
hensylee
Well-known member
yea, Dennis. Not even to mention the companies outside the U.S. that process much of America's businesses, having access to all our personal information!
M
Mary
Bonzo,
What's your view of the public video taping of citizens that goes on in your country?
Are there any public areas that do not use video cameras for surveillance?
What's your view of the public video taping of citizens that goes on in your country?
Are there any public areas that do not use video cameras for surveillance?
Bonzo Dog
Well-known member
I have very mixed views Mary.
The libertarian in me finds it deeply offensive and threatening when almost my every move will be flickering on a screen somewhere.
Then viewing surveillance footage that helped dismantle the London tube bombers network, I am thankful.
It really is a hard call, civil liberties versus security???????????????????????
Cameras are everywhere. Even graveyards aren't spared. They are in there to deter vandalism.
Then I see the amount of ordinary/minor crime going unsolved and unpunished. In many cases the criminals will be filmed. The police don't have the resources and manpower to follow up and take action. So why have the cameras?
M
Mary
My thoughts run along the same lines as yours, but thought that I should check since you're the one who has to deal with it.
It is a hard call.
Are they throughout the country or only in London?
It is a hard call.
Are they throughout the country or only in London?
G
geebee
As long as we live in a world where an individual's rights are deemed less important than those of the masses, Big Brother will continue to get more and more powerful. I, personally, would not like my every move recorded just so a few criminals can be photographed in the act of a crime that wasn't prevented anyway.
Bonzo Dog
Well-known member
Nationwide.
Many domestic installations also. My slightly paranoid isolationist next door neighbour has a camera back and a camera front of his house. They are linked to his TV so he can see what is happening outside at anytime. Signs on his garden railings read "This house is constantly monitored by CCTV"
I thought of putting signs on my railings saying "This house is constantly guarded by a madman with pointed stick" Our local take away fish and chip shop has cameras inside. Supposedly for staff security. The staff tell me the semi retired owner is able to access the feed on his PC hundreds of miles away in sunny Spain. Thus he can monitor staff performance and comings and goings.
My neighbour has a camera pointed on her farm entrance so that she knows if a visitor has arrived when she is working in her office.
I would have thought that her 2 large barking German Shepherd dogs would be notice enough!
I would have thought that her 2 large barking German Shepherd dogs would be notice enough!
