Slashdot Mirror
Body Camera Maker Will Let Cops Live-Stream Their Encounters (fastcompany.com)
tedlistens writes: Police officers wearing new cameras by Axon, the U.S.'s largest body camera supplier, will soon be able to send live video from their cameras back to base and elsewhere, potentially expanding police surveillance. Another feature of the new device -- set to be released next year -- triggers the camera to start recording and alerts command staff once an officer has fired their weapon, a possible corrective to the problem of officers forgetting to switch them on. (The initial price of $699 doesn't include other costs, like a subscription to Axon's Evidence.com data management system.)
But adding new technologies to body camera video introduces new privacy concerns, say legal experts, who have cautioned that a network of live-streaming cameras risks turning officers into roving sentinels for a giant panopticon-like surveillance system. Harlan Yu, the executive director of Upturn, a Washington nonprofit consultancy that has studied body cameras, says that live-streaming could erode community trust and help enable more controversial technologies like real-time face recognition. "The capability to live stream all BWC footage back to a department- or precinct-wide command center... will further entrench body-worn cameras as tools for police surveillance of communities, rather than tools for transparency," he said.
But adding new technologies to body camera video introduces new privacy concerns, say legal experts, who have cautioned that a network of live-streaming cameras risks turning officers into roving sentinels for a giant panopticon-like surveillance system. Harlan Yu, the executive director of Upturn, a Washington nonprofit consultancy that has studied body cameras, says that live-streaming could erode community trust and help enable more controversial technologies like real-time face recognition. "The capability to live stream all BWC footage back to a department- or precinct-wide command center... will further entrench body-worn cameras as tools for police surveillance of communities, rather than tools for transparency," he said.
I recall reading that some early body cameras were designed to continuously record into a 30-60s buffer, and then when the camera is set to 'record' it dumps the buffer and then appends in real time. Whether this actually happens or is better or worse is up for debate.
I thought the whole point of body cameras was to establish what happened during police shootings. Am I missing something? You can't have it both ways; either 1) you get recordings of police (mis)behavior, or 2) you get no recordings and your privacy remains intact. Pick one. Personally, I'd opt for letting the police record their interaction with me. I think it decreases the likelihood that things will end badly for me.
continuously record into a 30-60s buffer, and then when the camera is set to 'record' it dumps the buffer
This feature caught Baltimore police planting drugs in an attempt to fake body camera footage. Had they been an extra 30 seconds corrupt they would have got away with it.
Police cameras should be running 24/7. It's not surveillance it's evidence, both for and against police actions.
Which is why police would never agree to it willingly. Police love body cameras so long as they control when they get turned on, what gets saved and who gets to see the footage.
Otherwise, they hate body cams.
I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.