3 ms·
Actually, I think some of the laws DO ban distributing the videos: Many of these bills are explicit about not just targeting the people who do the investig
by spacemanaki 14y ago
Actually, I think some of the laws DO ban distributing the videos:
Many of these bills are explicit about not just targeting the people
who do the investigation but the people who distributed it, who
republish it. For instance, there was an investigation a couple of
years ago that at the same time the group, Mercy for Animals, was
conducting the investigation ABC news was following along with it,
aired the same footage, after they verified it, and it drew national
attention to this and criminal charges. Under these bills, in North
Carolina, for example, both the investigator and the journalist would
be wrapped up together.
http://www.onthemedia.org/2013/mar/01/states-consider-so-called-ag-gag-bills/transcript/ http://www.onthemedia.org/2013/mar/01/states-consider-so-cal...
I'm looking for more references now.
- spacemanaki 14y agoThe N Carolina law mentioned appears not to have any reference to distribution: http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2013/Bills/Senate/PDF/S648v1.pdf http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2013/Bills/Senate/PDF/S648v1.p... However this law in Indiana does, http://www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2013/SB/SB0373.2.html http://www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2013/SB/SB0373.2.html IANAL but this appears to make distribution of such recordings illegal: Makes it unlawful recording of agricultural or industrial operations, a Class A infraction, for a person, with intent to harass, defame, annoy, or harm, to: (1) enter real property that is owned by another person and on which agricultural operations or industrial operations are being conducted; (2) take a photograph of or make a video recording or motion picture of the real property, structures located on the real property, or the agricultural operations or industrial operations being conducted on the real property; and (3) distribute the photograph or recording; without the written consent of the owner of the real property or an authorized representative of the owner.
- ensignavenger 14y agoIANAL, but the above citation says AND, implying that it may be legal to take the photo or recording, if you don't also distribute it, or to distribute it, if you don't also create it- so you would have to do both. I may be completely wrong with this interpretation though, and the wording is too vague.
- spacemanaki 14y agoGood catch! I guess you'd have to take it to a lawyer to be sure... I wish that On The Media bit did a better job with citations.