Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 31

Thread: Transmitting and recording OC police encounters to a secure remote location

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Rochester Hills, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    338

    Post imported post

    Guys,

    From recent threads on Michigan forum I realize that some cops out there looking to harass and people who OC. Recording such encounters becomes critical in protecting ourselves.

    It was pretty much established that in Michigan I can record conversations in which I participate. I do not have to ask permission of other parties that are part of thesame conversation. This is true for phone conversations and for recordings made via hidden digital recorder when encounter police. The most important point is that I must be a participant of the sameconversation.

    It was also established that participant can record but not broadcast the conversation. This point becomes important if I want to record my encounter and transmit it in real time to a remote recording device. This is important because if I get arrested by a anti OC LEO, I will be eventuallysearched. They will most likely discover my recording device. What will happen next is almost certain: my recorder will either be destroyed or recording erased. If I transmitted my encounter live to a remote location (secure, meaning no one else can listen to it), then it will be impossible forpolice to erase anything up to the moment they discovered my hidden device.

    My understanding is that prohibition of"broadcasting" covers unsecured airways where others can overhear the conversation (such as radio). If conversation is transmitted via secured wi-fi channel or through a cellular phone, then this should not be considered "broadcasting" that is currently prohibited by Michigan Law. What are your thoughts? Do you have any references pointing one way or another?Do you think it is ok to transmit encounters live to a secure remote recording device?







  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Romulus/Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    306

    Post imported post

    Broadcasting is the distribution of audio and/or video signals which transmit programs to an audience. The audience may be the general public or a relatively large sub-audience, such as children or young adults.

    Transmission of sound or images by radio or television.

    Transmission of sound or images to a large number of receivers by radio or television.


    Thus, an Internet channel may distribute text or music worldwide, while a public address system in a workplace may broadcast very limited ad hoc "soundbites" to a small population within its range. Broadcasting may involve auditory information only, as in radio, or visual, or a combination, as in television. As technology has advanced, so too have the forms of broadcasting. Historically, the term broadcasting usually has referred to the radio and television industries. Broadcasting was previously synonymous with "over the air" broadcasts, where the radio frequency spectrum is limited and thus regulated; but with the advent of direct (satellite) radio broadcasting and especially cable television, channels (and programming variety) are far more numerous (digital cable television can support hundreds of different channels) and are subscriber-based. The concept and ability of broadcasting to convey the same information, whether announcements of current events, educational material or simply entertainment, to a worldwide audience simultaneously, is a great advance in allowing humankind to overcome long-standing barriers.



  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    Simply announce that you are recording LIVE.

    Either that - or record using a program that auto-backups to a "private" store location. Most of the live broadcast apps will let you do this.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    I personally like the way porcupine 411 has a voice mailing system which people can call in and it distributes the audio recording to a downline list of everyone who's signed up.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    oops doubletap

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Romulus/Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    306

    Post imported post

    Let me simpify the answer to your question. Broadcasting is a term referenced by the FCC in regards to RF (radio frequency) broadcasting. No such guidelines apply to internet feeds. Cell phones, Wifi or any other digital related communications. It only applys to RF transmissions.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Rochester Hills, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    338

    Post imported post

    I found the following definitions of broadcasting in Webster online dictionary. All suggest that audienc or public is involved while broadcasting. It supports my theory that transmitting conversation to a secure remote location is not "broadcasting" that is prohibited by Law.

    " 1[/b] :[/b] to scatter or sow (as seed) over a broad area2[/b] :[/b] to make widely known3[/b] :[/b] to transmit or make public by means of radio or television"

    Also, this is definition of "transmitting":

    1 a[/b] :[/b] to send or convey from one person or place to another :[/b] forward b[/b] :[/b] to cause or allow to spread: as (1)[/i] :[/b] to convey by or as if by inheritance or heredity :[/b] hand down (2)[/i] :[/b] to convey (infection) abroad or to another 2 a [/i](1)[/i] :[/b] to cause (as light or force) to pass or be conveyed through space or a medium (2)[/i] :[/b] to admit the passage of :[/b] conduct <glass transmits[/i] light> b[/b] :[/b] to send out (a signal) either by radio waves or over a wireintransitive verb[/i] :[/b] to send out a signal either by radio waves or over a wire



  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    As far as I can tell - there are no laws prohibiting the dissemination/broadcast of a lawful recording.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Rochester Hills, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    338

    Post imported post

    Understood. I know recording is legal. However, I am still trying to understand if transmitting live conversation to a remote recording device could be classified as an illigal broadcasting by a judge.

    wardog6d wrote:
    Let me simpify the answer to your question. Broadcasting is a term referenced by the FCC in regards to RF (radio frequency) broadcasting. No such guidelines apply to internet feeds. Cell phones, Wifi or any other digital related communications. It only applys to RF transmissions.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830

    Post imported post

    I carry multiple spy cams which are not easily identified, and can only be erased by smashing them or hooking them to a computer. I also have an unregistered phone to call 911 in case I get detained.

    911 is a secure off site recording, that's for sure. And it would be tough for a judge to find a reason not to allow the 911 recording in as evidence. It is also good, because you can ask the dispatcher to send state troopers.
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Rochester Hills, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    338

    Post imported post

    I can not readily find source, but while you can record converrsation you are part of without announcing it to other participants, you can not "broadcast" it. This is why I am trying to understand it. My understanding is that while recording conversation you can not at the same time broadcast it over open radio frequancies. I am trying to understand if transmitting this conversation via secure wi-fi channel or via cellular phone to a recording device is a different thing and is not illigal.



    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    As far as I can tell - there are no laws prohibiting the dissemination/broadcast of a lawful recording.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Romulus/Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    306

    Post imported post

    sasha601 wrote:
    I can not readily find source, but while you can record converrsation you are part of without announcing it to other participants, you can not "broadcast" it. This is why I am trying to understand it. My understanding is that while recording conversation you can not at the same time broadcast it over open radio frequancies. I am trying to understand if transmitting this conversation via secure wi-fi channel or via cellular phone to a recording device is a different thing and is not illigal.



    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    As far as I can tell - there are no laws prohibiting the dissemination/broadcast of a lawful recording.
    Your missing part of the definition. Broadcasting is the distribution of audio and/or video signals which transmit programs to an audience over RF!" In other words whatever you are recording or that is live can not be broadcast over RF where an audiance can hear the live or recorded audio or video. Yes it is very different transmitting a digitaly encrypted audio or video recording as this is not being transmitted in a standard RF format where a general audiance can hear the transmission.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    sasha601 wrote:
    I can not readily find source, but while you can record converrsation you are part of without announcing it to other participants, you can not "broadcast" it. This is why I am trying to understand it. My understanding is that while recording conversation you can not at the same time broadcast it over open radio frequancies. I am trying to understand if transmitting this conversation via secure wi-fi channel or via cellular phone to a recording device is a different thing and is not illigal.

    Â*

    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    As far as I can tell - there are no laws prohibiting the dissemination/broadcast of a lawful recording.
    Prior to my post, I re-read all the Michigan laws pertaining to recording conversation - and again, I couldn't find it.

    If you can, I'd love to see it.

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    wardog6d wrote:
    sasha601 wrote:
    I can not readily find source, but while you can record converrsation you are part of without announcing it to other participants, you can not "broadcast" it. This is why I am trying to understand it. My understanding is that while recording conversation you can not at the same time broadcast it over open radio frequancies. I am trying to understand if transmitting this conversation via secure wi-fi channel or via cellular phone to a recording device is a different thing and is not illigal.

    Â*

    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    As far as I can tell - there are no laws prohibiting the dissemination/broadcast of a lawful recording.
    Your missing part of the definition. Broadcasting is the distribution of audio and/or video signals which transmit programs to an audience over RF!" In other words whatever you are recording or that is live can not be broadcast over RF where an audiance can hear the live or recorded audio or video. Yes it is very different transmitting a digitaly encrypted audio or video recording as this is not being transmitted in a standard RF format where a general audiance can hear the transmission.
    Federal definitions do not apply to Michigan law, unless it's defined in the same way in Michigan law.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Romulus/Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    306

    Post imported post

    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    wardog6d wrote:
    sasha601 wrote:
    I can not readily find source, but while you can record converrsation you are part of without announcing it to other participants, you can not "broadcast" it. This is why I am trying to understand it. My understanding is that while recording conversation you can not at the same time broadcast it over open radio frequancies. I am trying to understand if transmitting this conversation via secure wi-fi channel or via cellular phone to a recording device is a different thing and is not illigal.



    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    As far as I can tell - there are no laws prohibiting the dissemination/broadcast of a lawful recording.
    Your missing part of the definition. Broadcasting is the distribution of audio and/or video signals which transmit programs to an audience over RF!" In other words whatever you are recording or that is live can not be broadcast over RF where an audiance can hear the live or recorded audio or video. Yes it is very different transmitting a digitaly encrypted audio or video recording as this is not being transmitted in a standard RF format where a general audiance can hear the transmission.
    Federal definitions do not apply to Michigan law, unless it's defined in the same way in Michigan law.
    Haha you might want to tell the FCC that.............................................. .......................If you make a mistake in any RF broadcasting, or any radio related incident who comes to your door?

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    wardog6d wrote:
    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    wardog6d wrote:
    sasha601 wrote:
    I can not readily find source, but while you can record converrsation you are part of without announcing it to other participants, you can not "broadcast" it. This is why I am trying to understand it. My understanding is that while recording conversation you can not at the same time broadcast it over open radio frequancies. I am trying to understand if transmitting this conversation via secure wi-fi channel or via cellular phone to a recording device is a different thing and is not illigal.

    Â*

    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    As far as I can tell - there are no laws prohibiting the dissemination/broadcast of a lawful recording.
    Your missing part of the definition. Broadcasting is the distribution of audio and/or video signals which transmit programs to an audience over RF!" In other words whatever you are recording or that is live can not be broadcast over RF where an audiance can hear the live or recorded audio or video. Yes it is very different transmitting a digitaly encrypted audio or video recording as this is not being transmitted in a standard RF format where a general audiance can hear the transmission.
    Federal definitions do not apply to Michigan law, unless it's defined in the same way in Michigan law.
    Haha you might want to tell the FCC that.............................................. .......................If you make a mistake in any RF broadcasting, or any radio related incident who comes to your door?
    FCC doesn't enforce Michigan law.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Romulus/Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    306

    Post imported post

    The FCC enforces all radio RF related incidents. IE FCC enforcement burea and task force. In Michigan and all other states. They dontcare if its Michigan or federal law they enforce ANY Incident related to RF.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    wardog6d wrote:
    The FCC enforces all radio RF related incidents.
    Yes, but if michigan law is more restrictive than federal - they're not going to get involved.

    So long as they're in compliance with FCC - the FCC won't come to investigate.

    Besides, this is well off-topic at this point.

    The question is whether he may legally broadcast a recording live over the internet.

    According to Michigan law, I believe this to be legal.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Rochester Hills, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    338

    Post imported post



    I found this on the web. It suggests in first partthat recording conversation where person is a participant is legal. In second part it suggests that broadcasting the same conversation is illegal:



    "The eavesdropping statute has been interpreted by one court as applying only to situations in which a third party has intercepted a communication, an interpretation that makes it legal for a participant in a conversation to record that conversation without the permission of other parties. Sullivan v. Gray, 324 N.W.2d 58 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).

    The state supreme court stated in a July 1999 ruling that a participant in a conversation "may not unilaterally nullify other participants’ expectations of privacy by secretly broadcasting the conversation" and that the overriding inquiry should be whether the parties "intended and reasonably expected that the conversation was private." Therefore, it is likely that a recording party may not broadcast a recorded conversation without the consent of all parties. Dickerson v. Raphael, 601 N.W.2d 108 (Mich. 1999)."

    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    sasha601 wrote:
    I can not readily find source, but while you can record converrsation you are part of without announcing it to other participants, you can not "broadcast" it. This is why I am trying to understand it. My understanding is that while recording conversation you can not at the same time broadcast it over open radio frequancies. I am trying to understand if transmitting this conversation via secure wi-fi channel or via cellular phone to a recording device is a different thing and is not illigal.



    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    As far as I can tell - there are no laws prohibiting the dissemination/broadcast of a lawful recording.
    Prior to my post, I re-read all the Michigan laws pertaining to recording conversation - and again, I couldn't find it.

    If you can, I'd love to see it.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Rochester Hills, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    338

    Post imported post

    To be precise, I am asking if my conversation with another party can be transmitted to remote location to be recorded via wirelessinternet (wi-fi) or through cellular phone?

    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    wardog6d wrote:
    The FCC enforces all radio RF related incidents.
    Yes, but if michigan law is more restrictive than federal - they're not going to get involved.

    So long as they're in compliance with FCC - the FCC won't come to investigate.

    Besides, this is well off-topic at this point.

    The question is whether he may legally broadcast a recording live over the internet.

    According to Michigan law, I believe this to be legal.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    sasha601 wrote:
    Â*

    I found this on the web. It suggests in first partÂ*that recording conversation where person is a participant is legal. In second part it suggests that broadcasting the same conversation is illegal:

    Â*

    "The eavesdropping statute has been interpreted by one court as applying only to situations in which a third party has intercepted a communication, an interpretation that makes it legal for a participant in a conversation to record that conversation without the permission of other parties. Sullivan v. Gray, 324 N.W.2d 58 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).

    The state supreme court stated in a July 1999 ruling that a participant in a conversation "may not unilaterally nullify other participants’ expectations of privacy by secretly broadcasting the conversation" and that the overriding inquiry should be whether the parties "intended and reasonably expected that the conversation was private." Therefore, it is likely that a recording party may not broadcast a recorded conversation without the consent of all parties. Dickerson v. Raphael, 601 N.W.2d 108 (Mich. 1999)."
    So - what law would the transmitter be breaking? And what law would the viewer be breaking? That's the question.

    It would appear that it may be illegal to view the transmission, but not to transmit it - therefore, the viewer may be charged with MCL 750.539c, but the transmitter, as far as I can tell, is breaking no law.

    In addition - if a transmitter announces that they are broadcasting live - continuing a conversation after this fact is made known is implied consent to the broadcast, making all viewers in compliance with the law.

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Romulus/Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    306

    Post imported post

    sasha601 wrote:
    To be precise, I am asking if my conversation with another party can be transmitted to remote location to be recorded via wirelessinternet (wi-fi) or through cellular phone?

    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    wardog6d wrote:
    The FCC enforces all radio RF related incidents.
    Yes, but if michigan law is more restrictive than federal - they're not going to get involved.

    So long as they're in compliance with FCC - the FCC won't come to investigate.

    Besides, this is well off-topic at this point.

    The question is whether he may legally broadcast a recording live over the internet.

    According to Michigan law, I believe this to be legal.
    I agree with you. I believe it is legal. As no audience can hear the RF transmition over RF. This is do to the fact that the RF being used is both digital and encrypted therefore secure. No public access is available to the RF frequency in use. The FCC definaition clearly states RF broadcast to an audiance.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Rochester Hills, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    338

    Post imported post

    Announce to LEO that you aretransmitting live might be problematic if you are dealing with a determined anti-OC officer. At this point, LEO can forcibly search you and remove the device. A bad aoole LEO might tdo it, especially if no witnesses around. From that point you got nothing to record with and a very, very angree LEO. I think stratigically it is better not to announce that you are recording

    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    sasha601 wrote:

    I found this on the web. It suggests in first partthat recording conversation where person is a participant is legal. In second part it suggests that broadcasting the same conversation is illegal:



    "The eavesdropping statute has been interpreted by one court as applying only to situations in which a third party has intercepted a communication, an interpretation that makes it legal for a participant in a conversation to record that conversation without the permission of other parties. Sullivan v. Gray, 324 N.W.2d 58 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).

    The state supreme court stated in a July 1999 ruling that a participant in a conversation "may not unilaterally nullify other participants’ expectations of privacy by secretly broadcasting the conversation" and that the overriding inquiry should be whether the parties "intended and reasonably expected that the conversation was private." Therefore, it is likely that a recording party may not broadcast a recorded conversation without the consent of all parties. Dickerson v. Raphael, 601 N.W.2d 108 (Mich. 1999)."
    So - what law would the transmitter be breaking? And what law would the viewer be breaking? That's the question.

    It would appear that it may be illegal to view the transmission, but not to transmit it - therefore, the viewer may be charged with MCL 750.539c, but the transmitter, as far as I can tell, is breaking no law.

    In addition - if a transmitter announces that they are broadcasting live - continuing a conversation after this fact is made known is implied consent to the broadcast, making all viewers in compliance with the law.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Romulus/Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    306

    Post imported post

    sasha601 wrote:
    Announce to LEO that you aretransmitting live might be problematic if you are dealing with a determined anti-OC officer. At this point, LEO can forcibly search you and remove the device. A bad aoole LEO might tdo it, especially if no witnesses around. From that point you got nothing to record with and a very, very angree LEO. I think stratigically it is better not to announce that you are recording

    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    sasha601 wrote:

    I found this on the web. It suggests in first partthat recording conversation where person is a participant is legal. In second part it suggests that broadcasting the same conversation is illegal:



    "The eavesdropping statute has been interpreted by one court as applying only to situations in which a third party has intercepted a communication, an interpretation that makes it legal for a participant in a conversation to record that conversation without the permission of other parties. Sullivan v. Gray, 324 N.W.2d 58 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).

    The state supreme court stated in a July 1999 ruling that a participant in a conversation "may not unilaterally nullify other participants’ expectations of privacy by secretly broadcasting the conversation" and that the overriding inquiry should be whether the parties "intended and reasonably expected that the conversation was private." Therefore, it is likely that a recording party may not broadcast a recorded conversation without the consent of all parties. Dickerson v. Raphael, 601 N.W.2d 108 (Mich. 1999)."
    So - what law would the transmitter be breaking? And what law would the viewer be breaking? That's the question.

    It would appear that it may be illegal to view the transmission, but not to transmit it - therefore, the viewer may be charged with MCL 750.539c, but the transmitter, as far as I can tell, is breaking no law.

    In addition - if a transmitter announces that they are broadcasting live - continuing a conversation after this fact is made known is implied consent to the broadcast, making all viewers in compliance with the law.
    You are not required to inform the person according to Michigan law. Some youtube open carries actually have 2 recording devices just in case this were to occur.

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    wardog6d wrote:
    sasha601 wrote:
    Announce to LEO that you areÂ*transmitting live might be problematic if you are dealing with a determined anti-OC officer. At this point, LEO can forcibly search you and remove the device. A bad aoole LEO might tdo it, especially if no witnesses around. From that point you got nothing to record with and a very, very angree LEO. I think stratigically it is better not to announce that you are recordingÂ*

    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    sasha601 wrote:
    Â*

    I found this on the web. It suggests in first partÂ*that recording conversation where person is a participant is legal. In second part it suggests that broadcasting the same conversation is illegal:

    Â*

    "The eavesdropping statute has been interpreted by one court as applying only to situations in which a third party has intercepted a communication, an interpretation that makes it legal for a participant in a conversation to record that conversation without the permission of other parties. Sullivan v. Gray, 324 N.W.2d 58 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).

    The state supreme court stated in a July 1999 ruling that a participant in a conversation "may not unilaterally nullify other participants’ expectations of privacy by secretly broadcasting the conversation" and that the overriding inquiry should be whether the parties "intended and reasonably expected that the conversation was private." Therefore, it is likely that a recording party may not broadcast a recorded conversation without the consent of all parties. Dickerson v. Raphael, 601 N.W.2d 108 (Mich. 1999)."
    So - what law would the transmitter be breaking? And what law would the viewer be breaking? That's the question.

    It would appear that it may be illegal to view the transmission, but not to transmit it - therefore, the viewer may be charged with MCL 750.539c, but the transmitter, as far as I can tell, is breaking no law.

    In addition - if a transmitter announces that they are broadcasting live - continuing a conversation after this fact is made known is implied consent to the broadcast, making all viewers in compliance with the law.
    You are not required to inform the person according to Michigan law. Some youtube open carries actually have 2 recording devices just in case this were to occur.

    To be certain - any official encounter with police is by definition not a private conversation - so any recording and subsequent broadcast is lawful.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •