They make it much harder for law enforcement to lie about their own
actions, and just get everyone all fired up. Why not ask Apple (for
starters) to build in a “feature” on a future generation of iPhones that
will allow cameras to be disabled remotely?
A patent
granted to Apple this month details technology that remotely disables
iPhone cameras using infrared sensors. Someone you do not know and
cannot see will be able, without your permission, to disable the camera
on a phone you own and are legally using, perhaps to take video of your
son’s Little League game, perhaps to take video of a police officer
choking to death an innocent man.
Apple’s patent application used the example of a rock band wanting to prevent audience members from recording a concert. Nasty bootleggers and their darn YouTubing!
While the First Amendment, backed up by much case law, guarantees the
right of citizens to record the actions of government employees,
including the police, conducting their duties in public places, the
Amendment does not guarantee corporate America has to sell you the
technology to do so. It is Constitutionally unclear if a police force
using such technology to block video would violate the First Amendment
(hey, you could switch over to your Dad’s camcorder that’s in the
basement), but knowing the way things work, the cops would try it first,
worry about court cases later.
And indeed you can hear the arguments terrorism, national security
event, blahblahblah. Perhaps the police could designate First Amendment
Video Zones outside any large event where citizens could shoot video of
each other to their heart’s content?
Another interesting legal question would be the effect of citizens
using some other technology to disable the technology used by police to
disable camera phones. Would that become illegal, the way some states
have made the use of radar detectors in your car illegal?
So as the cops like to say, “Hey, nothing to see here folks, move along.”
