Internet law -

[memon421]

Hi,

Is it ok to post a video on Youtube of thief stealing something? I have one video, thief tried to steal something but police caught him. In video, thief is trying to steal stuff on the road. The face is not blurred and face is not clear too. But, one can recognize person who knows him already.

Is it illegal to post such video on Youtube in Finland. I am in Europe and I am international student here.

Thanks

[rinso]

Hi,

Is it ok to post a video on Youtube of thief stealing something? I have one video, thief tried to steal something but police caught him. In video, thief is trying to steal stuff on the road. The face is not blurred and face is not clear too. But, one can recognize person who knows him already.

Is it illegal to post such video on Youtube in Finland. I am in Europe and I am international student here.

Thanks

If the thief was already caught, what is the use of uploading the video other than naming and shaming?
The thief could easily make a case against you for violating his privacy.
I know several cases in the EU where uploaders were punished even if the video/photo was used to capture the perpetrator.
In one case the judge even reduce the sentence for a violent criminal because his picture was circulated (by the police) on internet.

[Alex.Sm]

Hi,

Is it ok to post a video on Youtube of thief stealing something? I have one video, thief tried to steal something but police caught him. In video, thief is trying to steal stuff on the road. The face is not blurred and face is not clear too. But, one can recognize person who knows him already.

Is it illegal to post such video on Youtube in Finland. I am in Europe and I am international student here.

Thanks

Who cares, put it online! That will make a good video on liveleak.com There are way you can upload stuff anonymously, make a tour at the place where the action happened and make sure that there are no security cameras around. Then upload that stuff

It might be as rinso mentioned that there are some crazy stupid rules where criminals have more rights then you have but hey put it online

[foca]

What is your reason for uploading the video?

[ajdias]

If you upload it's unlikely that you'll face consequences. However, if there was damage to the individual reputation (let's say that against all odds the video gets viral) it wouldn't be very hard to track you down, even if you were to use anonymity tools.

AFAIK, in Finland, the police sometimes publish images of individuals and ask for reprint from the press accompanied with a caption like "do you recognize this person?" For the most part people who commit crimes are still untitled to basic rights, like privacy and not having their past shadowing their lives. People coming from other cultures or that have watched too many of those dumb shows like "cheaters" or "dumb criminals" may have some trouble understanding this.

[AldenG]

I hate cases with so much ambiguity. It does appear, however, that at the very least, neither player -- the one who was acquitted or the one who was found guilty for the same participation in the same offense -- showed much respect for the dignity or personhood of the woman. OTOH, they're pro footballers and we're supposed to be surprised and shocked?

The same good argument for keeping him out on grounds of character could be made about a lot of unconvicted players.

If I were his defense attorney, I'd be asking, Wait, let me make sure I understand this: if you're blotto and decide to drive, you're fully responsible for the consequences of a fatal accident even up to the point of life imprisonment or (in some countries) the death penalty. But if you're blotto and decide to have sex, you were legally incapable of making a responsible decision and your partner has ipso facto committed rape. Interesting double standard.

But then again, I'd never BE his defense attorney.

How come she wasn't drug-tested? A positive finding would have made life a lot easier for members of the jury. This sounds like a classic compromise verdict -- we can't be sure, so we'll convict one and let the other go.

[AldenG]

As to what the fans want, I think they should get it. But if they're going to profess outrage, it should be against both players. And indeed about the rape culture in professional football generally. After watching a lot of the World Cup, I didn't see much difference compared to American oblong football. And in fact it looked like some countries outright cheated more than you'd ever see on the field in US football, and that was surprising to me.

If the verdict is unsafe, let that be revisited. It does seem very unlikely that one can be factually innocent and the other factually guilty. But the law tends to be both blunt and dull, and rarely moreso than in these types of cases.

[Upphew]

There was recently a news about a footballer in UK, he was convicted for rape and served 5 years in Prison, now when he's about to be out, 60,000 people signed petition for the clud to not employ him again. How fare is that? huge mass of people signing petition for one past criminal not to get employment? even after serving time for what he did. wtf? http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-28781132

He plays with fan's and advertiser's money. If fan and consumer don't want him to play, why blame them? You @#$% up with law and it might mean you can't do your job be it footballer or coder or construction worker. I know about a case where someone got drug conviction and couldn't do coding job for mil.fi because of it. Paid fines, was thing of past, didn't get the job.

[Upphew]

You @#$% up with law and it might mean you can't do your job be it footballer or coder or construction worker

So what you expect to do with past criminals, force them for crime again? they need to make their living anyhow.

I expect them to make their living. McD doesn't do background checks and if you flip burgers customers won't care what kind of criminal you are as long as they are yummy. There are jobs that doesn't involve as much spotlight and customer satisfaction as playing ball as professional.

[AldenG]

They very much act as role models, particularly to younger fans, who both consciously and unconsciously emulate them in myriad ways on the field and off.

Do you say to fans, it's OK to have a rape or two in your background, just try not to get caught or convicted. That is EXACTLY the message many American teens and college-age athletes and others have taken to heart. Are you saying it's so different in the EU?

[macora]

Cut the offending part off, and I am perfectly fine discussing which job he should get.

[ajdias]

He plays with fan's and advertiser's money. If fan and consumer don't want him to play, why blame them? You @#$% up with law and it might mean you can't do your job be it footballer or coder or construction worker. I know about a case where someone got drug conviction and couldn't do coding job for mil.fi because of it. Paid fines, was thing of past, didn't get the job.

If you were to listen to fans you wouldn't have black players or gays... These people are hardly team fans, some of them undoubtedly are, most of them are just "internet do gooders" signing up for a cause in order to have a good conscience while possibly being used as numbers by some pressure groups...
The case you are talking involves clear rules and restrictions that existed and were clear at the time of his deeds, and they existed for a reason, even if they may not make sense nowadays... Besides, they are universal, they apply to anybody applying to certain jobs.
But you do have a point about advertisers. You don't have extra credits for "standing up and supporting the rehabilitation of individuals who commit a crime and pay the price" [that's jail or whatever the court orders], so they may cave in...