←back to thread

Judge denies request to exempt Flock footage from Public Records Act

(www.goskagit.com)
128 points p_ing | 2 comments | 09 Nov 25 00:53 UTC | HN request time: 0.49s | source
Show context
jmpman ◴[09 Nov 25 02:24 UTC] No.45862348[source]▶
https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/08/us/melodee-buzzard-missing-se...

How was all of this data gathered without being a violation?

replies(1): >>45862528 #
FireBeyond ◴[09 Nov 25 03:03 UTC] No.45862528[source]▶
This is a reasonably common (sadly) methodology that many agencies utilize.

"We are not legally permitted to blanket surveil/ALPR entire neighborhoods/towns, etc. ...

... and we can't pay a private company to do this for us ...

... but nothing prevents us from paying a private company who is doing it already, to give us that data."

The line between the last two is blurry but also utilized - you can't put out an RFP for a company to capture such data that you're not permitted to, but if that company is doing it because it sees a/your market for it, then it's a free-for-all.

replies(2): >>45862814 #>>45863225 #
1. RHSeeger ◴[09 Nov 25 04:06 UTC] No.45862814[source]▶
And, I assume, you can pay them to put up a "this is how fast you are going, slow down" sign. And they can add a camera to it, that has nothing to do with you paying them to put it up in the first place... and then sell them access to data from the camera.
replies(1): >>45863180 #
2. FireBeyond ◴[09 Nov 25 05:31 UTC] No.45863180[source]▶
Yeah, it's very nudge nudge wink wink. Which is why Flock advertises to HOAs and private businesses too. Because then they'll agree to share their data and hey look, Flock can say "we have ALPR and other data from this HOA, you can have it because you didn't ask us to get it for you".