Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Submission Preview

Link to Story

Taser/Axon Separating Defense Lawyers From Body Camera Footage Via License Agreements

Accepted submission by -- OriginalOwner_ http://tinyurl.com/OriginalOwner at 2017-05-09 06:36:41 from the eulas-superceding-laws dept.
Digital Liberty

TechDirt reports [techdirt.com]

Taser Inc.'s quiet takeover of evidence generation and storage--through extensive body camera offerings--was put on public display when the company rebranded as Axon. The company was willing to give away cameras [techdirt.com] in exchange for something far more lucrative: software licensing and footage access fees in perpetuity.

Axon even nailed down a choice URL: Evidence.com. This is the portal to law enforcement body camera footage stored in Axon's cloud--the real moneymaker for Axon. The cameras are just the gateway drug.

But much of what's stored at Evidence.com could be considered public records. Much of what's stored there could also be subject to discovery by defense attorneys during criminal proceedings. But no one asked defense attorneys if this arrangement worked for them. It was enough that it worked for cops.

Defense attorney Rick Horowitz has a problem with contractual agreements he's being asked to sign when attempting to gain access to records regarding his client. Instead of handing out files, prosecutors are handing out URLs. To obtain the records he needs, Horowitz is forced to use Axon's portal... and sign agreements with Axon before he's allowed to access anything [rhdefense.com][1]. (via Simple Justice [simplejustice.us][2])

[...][It gets worse.] California law provides extensive protections [ca.gov] for the privacy of juveniles--even those accused of crimes. But these appear to have been ignored by every law enforcement agency that agreed to do business with Axon. These are also being ignored by Axon, which treats all uploaded footage equally. It doesn't meet California's privacy standards--a problem that only seems to concern those defending juvenile arrestees.

[1] Link fails for me; fails at archive.li too.

[2] Their HTML is black text on a black background (View; Use Style; No Style). That's not all that they didn't validate [w3.org].


Original Submission