10 ms·

This could be a 2 edge sword. How long until the Police departments are sued for unlicensed public performance of copyrighted music?

by jlawer 5y ago

rpvnwnkl 5y ago
Rather, why isn’t software available yet for end users to filter out copyrighted background noises?
- batch12 5y ago
  I wonder if, for everyone to get their cut still, you'd have to license the music to generate the anti-music pattern.
  - techdragon 5y ago
    I actually just mapped it out in my business ideas note folder and yeah. I don’t see how you can build a decent tool for this job without having copies of the actual waveforms requiring some form of commercial license, however it would not need to be a performance license which seems to be the thing the publishers are most familiar licensing. So I’m not sure if this would make the process easier or harder but I definitely don’t see how they can argue the rights to use but not play the music are more valuable so they should in theory be cheaper than the sort of price iTunes and Spotify are paying per track.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      It should be part of the YouTube post-upload processing. You find another YouTube link of the offending music, it syncs the two audio tracks, and removes from your upload.
- simfree 5y ago
  Adding audio is much easier than subtracting audio from a recording when said audio is distorted by imperfect speakers and recorded by imperfect microphones and has who knows what other background noises mixed in. Said denoiser could easily destroy the audio your looking to preserve, and the altered audio is not good quality evidence of the events that occurred.
- notjulianjaynes 5y ago
  There is software like Spleeter [1] that can split songs into stems (seperate drums, vocals, rhythm, etc.) using ML. I imagine it would be possible to adapt it for this. Might even work as-is if you only needed to isolate people's voices. 1. https://github.com/deezer/spleeter https://github.com/deezer/spleeter
alphabettsy 5y ago
Unless it comes out of their pocket it’s still the taxpayers funding their misdeeds.
- HarryHirsch 5y ago
  And that's actually fine, because sheriff is an elected office. The good citizens of Alameda County voted for a sheriff who enables warrior cops, they get to pay for the cops' actions because they support the state of affairs.
  - ahahahahah 5y ago
    Presented with no comment, the part of the article about the alameda county sheriff: > The Alameda County Sheriff's Department has learned from this Streisanding, and has since made it official policy to forbid the playing of copyrighted content for the sole purpose of thwarting the recording of officers by members of the public.
  - simfree 5y ago
    What pool of candidates is the sheriff allowed to be elected from? In many counties the candidates for sheriff must be active employees of the department or similar, making for an extremely narrow pool of candidates with plenty of opportunity for the incumbent to make their competitors ineligible to run.
    - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
      > the candidates for sheriff must be active employees of the department or similar Who made these inane rules? At the end of the day, if a county goes bankrupt for enacting stupid measures, it's on its citizens. Especially if they didn't even bother voting.
    - dredmorbius 5y ago
      Anyone filing a valid candidacy application can run for the office in Alameda County (or in California AFAIU, where the state Secretary of Sate defines qualifications). https://www.acvote.org/candidates/how-to-run https://www.acvote.org/candidates/how-to-run Ballotpedia has a more complete narrative description: https://ballotpedia.org/How_to_run_for_office_in_California https://ballotpedia.org/How_to_run_for_office_in_California It's not even clear to me that there is an minimumm age requirement for municipal or state office. There are a set of petition and/or filing-fee requirements. Alabama is a state in which I might expect more stringent requirements to be in place. Those are: 18+ years of age, 1 day+ state residency, 1 day+ US citizen, and registered voter. Terms are 4 years, with no limit on terms served. https://www.sos.alabama.gov/alabama-votes/candidates/qualifications-public-office https://www.sos.alabama.gov/alabama-votes/candidates/qualifi...
mannerheim 5y ago
The government has immunity from copyright lawsuits.
- elliekelly 5y ago
  Is this true? I remember a while ago USPS lost a copyright suit for using a photo of the statue of liberty from the Las Vegas hotel on a stamp. Edit:https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/post-office-owes-3-5m-for-using-wrong-statue-of-liberty-on-a-stamp/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/post-office-owes...
  - aaomidi 5y ago
    It's more so the govt needs to allow you to sue the govt...sooo
  - mannerheim 5y ago
    > On March 23, 2020, the Supreme Court held that the provisions of the Copyright Act subjecting states to liability for infringement did not validly abrogate states’ sovereign immunity from suit. As a result, copyright owners suffering infringement by state entities cannot seek the remedies provided by the Copyright Act. https://www.copyright.gov/policy/state-sovereign-immunity/ https://www.copyright.gov/policy/state-sovereign-immunity/
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > The government has immunity from copyright lawsuits. That's kind of (but not very) true of the Federal government [0]. It's not at all true of state governments or local governments. [0] They have somewhat different liability than normal actors, which can only be pursued in the Court of Federal Claims.
  - dredmorbius 5y ago
    Nope, federal government too: https://www.nolo.com/legal-updates/u-s-postal-service-liable-for-copyright-infringement-of-las-vegas-statue-of-liberty.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-updates/u-s-postal-service-liable...
gpm 5y ago
Really this police officer should be charged criminally as well... with intentional copyright infringement. Someone else elsewhere in this thread is citing some civil rights statute, but the idea of charging with copyright infringement is just... amusing. If only prosecutors didn't hate charging cops.
- FpUser 5y ago
  Unfortunately in the US the government is immune from copyright infringement. PS. Taking it back as I was proven wrong
  - gpm 5y ago
    This is incorrect (in the normal civil context), as discussed elsewhere in this thread. But also, I'm suggesting criminally charging the individual officers, not the government. Police officers are not generally immune to criminal laws, so citation requested that they would be in this instance (it is possible, there are certainly some weird exceptions in the law for LEO, but I'm not aware of one here).
    - FpUser 5y ago
      >"But also, I'm suggesting criminally charging the individual officers, not the government." You might have a problem with prosecution agreeing to prosecute such case I think.
  - dredmorbius 5y ago
    False: https://www.nolo.com/legal-updates/u-s-postal-service-liable-for-copyright-infringement-of-las-vegas-statue-of-liberty.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-updates/u-s-postal-service-liable...
    - FpUser 5y ago
      I am glad to be proven wrong.

This could be a 2 edge sword. How long until the Police departments are sued for unlicensed public performance of copyrighted music?

by jlawer 5y ago

This could be a 2 edge sword. How long until the Police departments are sued for unlicensed public performance of copyrighted music?

rpvnwnkl 5y ago

Rather, why isn’t software available yet for end users to filter out copyrighted background noises?

batch12 5y ago
I wonder if, for everyone to get their cut still, you'd have to license the music to generate the anti-music pattern.
- techdragon 5y ago
  I actually just mapped it out in my business ideas note folder and yeah. I don’t see how you can build a decent tool for this job without having copies of the actual waveforms requiring some form of commercial license, however it would not need to be a performance license which seems to be the thing the publishers are most familiar licensing. So I’m not sure if this would make the process easier or harder but I definitely don’t see how they can argue the rights to use but not play the music are more valuable so they should in theory be cheaper than the sort of price iTunes and Spotify are paying per track.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    It should be part of the YouTube post-upload processing. You find another YouTube link of the offending music, it syncs the two audio tracks, and removes from your upload.
simfree 5y ago
Adding audio is much easier than subtracting audio from a recording when said audio is distorted by imperfect speakers and recorded by imperfect microphones and has who knows what other background noises mixed in. Said denoiser could easily destroy the audio your looking to preserve, and the altered audio is not good quality evidence of the events that occurred.
notjulianjaynes 5y ago
There is software like Spleeter [1] that can split songs into stems (seperate drums, vocals, rhythm, etc.) using ML. I imagine it would be possible to adapt it for this. Might even work as-is if you only needed to isolate people's voices. 1. https://github.com/deezer/spleeter https://github.com/deezer/spleeter

alphabettsy 5y ago

Unless it comes out of their pocket it’s still the taxpayers funding their misdeeds.

HarryHirsch 5y ago
And that's actually fine, because sheriff is an elected office. The good citizens of Alameda County voted for a sheriff who enables warrior cops, they get to pay for the cops' actions because they support the state of affairs.
- ahahahahah 5y ago
  Presented with no comment, the part of the article about the alameda county sheriff: > The Alameda County Sheriff's Department has learned from this Streisanding, and has since made it official policy to forbid the playing of copyrighted content for the sole purpose of thwarting the recording of officers by members of the public.
- simfree 5y ago
  What pool of candidates is the sheriff allowed to be elected from? In many counties the candidates for sheriff must be active employees of the department or similar, making for an extremely narrow pool of candidates with plenty of opportunity for the incumbent to make their competitors ineligible to run.
  - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
    > the candidates for sheriff must be active employees of the department or similar Who made these inane rules? At the end of the day, if a county goes bankrupt for enacting stupid measures, it's on its citizens. Especially if they didn't even bother voting.
  - dredmorbius 5y ago
    Anyone filing a valid candidacy application can run for the office in Alameda County (or in California AFAIU, where the state Secretary of Sate defines qualifications). https://www.acvote.org/candidates/how-to-run https://www.acvote.org/candidates/how-to-run Ballotpedia has a more complete narrative description: https://ballotpedia.org/How_to_run_for_office_in_California https://ballotpedia.org/How_to_run_for_office_in_California It's not even clear to me that there is an minimumm age requirement for municipal or state office. There are a set of petition and/or filing-fee requirements. Alabama is a state in which I might expect more stringent requirements to be in place. Those are: 18+ years of age, 1 day+ state residency, 1 day+ US citizen, and registered voter. Terms are 4 years, with no limit on terms served. https://www.sos.alabama.gov/alabama-votes/candidates/qualifications-public-office https://www.sos.alabama.gov/alabama-votes/candidates/qualifi...

mannerheim 5y ago

The government has immunity from copyright lawsuits.

elliekelly 5y ago
Is this true? I remember a while ago USPS lost a copyright suit for using a photo of the statue of liberty from the Las Vegas hotel on a stamp. Edit:https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/post-office-owes-3-5m-for-using-wrong-statue-of-liberty-on-a-stamp/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/post-office-owes...
- aaomidi 5y ago
  It's more so the govt needs to allow you to sue the govt...sooo
- mannerheim 5y ago
  > On March 23, 2020, the Supreme Court held that the provisions of the Copyright Act subjecting states to liability for infringement did not validly abrogate states’ sovereign immunity from suit. As a result, copyright owners suffering infringement by state entities cannot seek the remedies provided by the Copyright Act. https://www.copyright.gov/policy/state-sovereign-immunity/ https://www.copyright.gov/policy/state-sovereign-immunity/
dragonwriter 5y ago
> The government has immunity from copyright lawsuits. That's kind of (but not very) true of the Federal government [0]. It's not at all true of state governments or local governments. [0] They have somewhat different liability than normal actors, which can only be pursued in the Court of Federal Claims.
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  Nope, federal government too: https://www.nolo.com/legal-updates/u-s-postal-service-liable-for-copyright-infringement-of-las-vegas-statue-of-liberty.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-updates/u-s-postal-service-liable...

gpm 5y ago

Really this police officer should be charged criminally as well... with intentional copyright infringement. Someone else elsewhere in this thread is citing some civil rights statute, but the idea of charging with copyright infringement is just... amusing. If only prosecutors didn't hate charging cops.

FpUser 5y ago
Unfortunately in the US the government is immune from copyright infringement. PS. Taking it back as I was proven wrong
- gpm 5y ago
  This is incorrect (in the normal civil context), as discussed elsewhere in this thread. But also, I'm suggesting criminally charging the individual officers, not the government. Police officers are not generally immune to criminal laws, so citation requested that they would be in this instance (it is possible, there are certainly some weird exceptions in the law for LEO, but I'm not aware of one here).
  - FpUser 5y ago
    >"But also, I'm suggesting criminally charging the individual officers, not the government." You might have a problem with prosecution agreeing to prosecute such case I think.
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  False: https://www.nolo.com/legal-updates/u-s-postal-service-liable-for-copyright-infringement-of-las-vegas-statue-of-liberty.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-updates/u-s-postal-service-liable...
  - FpUser 5y ago
    I am glad to be proven wrong.