It seems to be footage from home surveillance and a cellphone. That's not public domain. Homeowner/person who shot the cellphone footage should be the rightful owners. If there was footage from police body camera, that had been released, as it is clearly in the public domain, the cops would have no standing.
Ongoing investigation doesn't matter if the footage is inherently public domain like from a body cam. If the police release it, fair game. As long as you're not outright stating these cops should be harmed, there shouldn't be a problem. Malicious intent would be hard to prove without a threat of some sort.
You can record law enforcement in public areas as long as you don't jeopardize yours or their safety. I don't see how the cops would have the rights of private citizens in the public while being a public servant in a private residence.
lastlist 0 points 2.1 years ago
It seems to be footage from home surveillance and a cellphone. That's not public domain. Homeowner/person who shot the cellphone footage should be the rightful owners. If there was footage from police body camera, that had been released, as it is clearly in the public domain, the cops would have no standing.
Ongoing investigation doesn't matter if the footage is inherently public domain like from a body cam. If the police release it, fair game. As long as you're not outright stating these cops should be harmed, there shouldn't be a problem. Malicious intent would be hard to prove without a threat of some sort.
You can record law enforcement in public areas as long as you don't jeopardize yours or their safety. I don't see how the cops would have the rights of private citizens in the public while being a public servant in a private residence.