This is how people ruin it for scanner owners!

[MrBruce]

I am one of those people who bought a brand-new, unused, Uniden Trunktracker V BCD996P2 scanner because our area is mostly P25 Phase II.

Now, before anyone jumps in with there are scanner apps and broadcastify out there, neither intentionally, identifies which police agency is currently transmitting during each transmission or certain communications and information are delayed.

Well, we have this inconsiderate multi-scanner owner who intentionally visually live streams his scanners on Facebook as a Facebook live video.

He points his cellphone right at the screen of his scanner showing which police agency is currently transmitting. He does this for the sole purpose of getting page likes to his supposed radio station media page claiming to be a legit news media company.

His videos include unlimited visual/audio feeds, to which he live streams for as long as he thinks it will get him page likes, shares and reactions.
I have asked this inconsiderate individual to stop doing this, because unlike his fake credentials, to which his is not a legitimate news journalist, I am and have been told many times, that law enforcement does not have to communicate unencrypted just because we feel it's illegal to encrypt police related communications, the process of all communications being encrypted fulltime is up to them and there is a consideration to do that full time.

Now I live in southeastern Connecticut approximately two miles northwest from Westerly Rhode Island. All of their transmissions are full encryption on a fulltime basis, with only one channel unencrypted that is never used. While I do not know the accuracy or legitimacy of this information, I was told Rhode Island went to fulltime encryption for the very same reasons I am concerned with here, their transmissions were being publicly rebroadcasted in real-time by a public source on the internet. I see this happening here as well.

While I know the person personally who is live streaming his scanners here in New London County, I nicely asked him to STOP doing it and told him why he should stop, I thought my reasoning was accepted and was seen as a valid, legit cause for his concern that he could be jeopardizing his own scanner's abilities. He agreed with me and he stopped doing it. That is until now. He realizes he is not getting 1000 new page followers to his Facebook page, 1000 new post shares of his posts and not getting tons in Facebook monetization dollars from Meta. So now he's back to posting his long live videos again, complete with audio and a direct closeup of his scanner LCD screens showing who is communicating during this particular time with his blow-by-blow description commentary of what is supposedly happening, although his dialog is mostly amateurish, misinformed blabbering. He is now making it clear on his Facebook page that he intends on doing this stunt fulltime and more often in the very next few days or so. Because he would be willing to destroy a hobby for everyone over being a bigshot on Facebook. My idea of owning a scanner is not listening to Coast Guard, Ham Radio and NOAA weather radio!!

I don't care how he defends his actions here, or anyone who defends his actions, he's ruining it for me to own and use a scanner to which I spent about $500.00 for brand new out of the box and listen to communications to which I am not sharing publicly and openly with my page followers. I have friends in Rhode Island who say we're lucky we can still listen to P25 Phase II unencrypted, but they do not see that actually lasting long with this selfish inconsiderate person in the area.

Just venting my anger here, if he does not like it, too bad. I also invested big dollars in my resources and equipment.
Photo is a 'still' example of what his videos show.

 

[kc2asb]

It seems clear that the negative aspects of social media outweigh any of its positives. Your anger is understandable.

While this clown's FARCEbook feed is not helping, it's doubtful that anything will slow the roll-out of encryption. As I've mentioned in other threads dealing with the topic, my local department (a small NJ city) encrypted everything 2-3 years ago, except for school buses and snow plows. No one was broadcasting their comms on social media, so it was not a factor in their decision. There was nothing to be done about it, so I moved on. I also have three digital scanners (996T, 996P2, and 536HP) which are repurposed for other comms, largely analog.

Hope your local agencies remain in the clear!

 

[MrBruce]

It seems clear that the negative aspects of social media outweigh any of its positives. Your anger is understandable.

While this clown's FARCEbook feed is not helping, it's doubtful that anything will slow the roll-out of encryption. As I've mentioned in other threads dealing with the topic, my local department (a small NJ city) encrypted everything 2-3 years ago, except for school buses and snow plows. No one was broadcasting their comms on social media, so it was not a factor in their decision. There was nothing to be done about it, so I moved on. I also have three digital scanners (996T, 996P2, and 536HP) which are repurposed for other comms, largely analog.

Hope your local agencies remain in the clear!

Because I have close communications with various law enforcement agencies in this area, they are aware of his existence and what he is doing. Are they okay with it? No, he was never given authorization rights to rebroadcast communications. Just because radio and TV broadcasts are publicly broadcasted on public airwaves, does not mean it's okay or legal to re-transmit or rebroadcast it like a 2-meter repeater does.

 

[kc2asb]

Because I have close communications with various law enforcement agencies in this area, they are aware of his existence and what he is doing. Are they okay with it? No, he was never given authorization rights to rebroadcast communications. Just because radio and TV broadcasts are publicly broadcasted on public airwaves, does not mean it's okay or legal to re-transmit or rebroadcast it like a 2-meter repeater does.

I agree with you. When I first got into the hobby, I learned the rule of "it's OK to listen but not to disclose what is heard".

It's no surprise that the agencies are unhappy with what this guy is doing. Perhaps they should try contacting FARCEbook and requesting that the feed be taken down. Obviously, an official request from law enforcement carries much more weight.

 

[Enforcer52]

So are you saying that the 7,527 feeds us folks are providing thru Broadcastify are not ok and are illegal? Along with all the other streaming platforms that are available?

As far as the LEs being unhappy, sadly now days the LE business has changed so much over the years, and they don't like anyone looking over their shoulders.

 

[UTE-GE]

Some people have it in their heads they are doing a "service" to others while not looking at the bigger picture.
But, like kc2asb said, "the roll out" is inevitable.
Would be interesting to know the impact it does actually have on their decision(s) to do so.
I'm sure it's a big one.

 

[nhfdcadet]

Any unencrpyted radio transmission is public just by nature. Not even Donald Trump himself could say you aren't allowed to listen on a scanner to an unencrypted radio channel, and/or share videos of such publicly, because it is public to begin with.
I'm sure this guy posting videos invested a hefty amount of money into his equipment too, and while you don't agree with his practices, he has every right to do so.

 

[UTE-GE]

So are you saying that the 7,527 feeds us folks are providing thru Broadcastify are not ok and are illegal? Along with all the other streaming platforms that are available?

As far as the LEs being unhappy, sadly now days the LE business has changed so much over the years, and they don't like anyone looking over their shoulders.

Not that it's not "ok", it's the human factor of, if it can be used for bad, it will be. Making things easier for numbskulls usually doesn't turn out well.

I'm not talking about the broadcaster(s) in general, but more of the people who use the broadcast to do the bad things.

Isn't there laws against "using" LE transmissions in a crime? Do they enforce it when caught? I HOPE SO.

This has been the argument for many years when Broadcastify was just in it's infancy.

Oh boy was it an argument.....

 

[nhfdcadet]

It would be even better for agencies to get ahead of the problem and host their OWN broadcastify feeds. Then theyre the ones in control, and they can even set a delay so the traffic doesnt go out in (close to) real time.

 

[seagravebuff60]

I understand your frustration on the matter at hand, but it is not illegal to do this. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it is wrong. And to think that you reached out personally to the owner of this steam is gutsy. If someone reached out to me about my streams and why they think it's wrong, I would tell them to pound sand.

Anyway, this seems like it is just basically a livestream on FB or YT and a visual representation of his setup. The same exact concept is streamed on Broadcastify. Yes, it's not a phone pointed at a scanner, but it basically is a rebroadcast or stream of communications. Broadcastify has become more advanced over the past decade, and more details can be shared than just streaming of audio. Some traditional Broadcastify feeds can stream alpha tags and whatnot. Also, the "calls" platform makes it easy to tell who is talking and when. RIDs, TGIDs, Time, Etc. There are hundreds of feeds on Broadcastify that public safety agencies provide for the public to listen to.

Many family members and close friends of mine are LEOs, EMTs, Firefighters, or dispatchers. Not once have I heard a negative complaint regarding public streaming of their coms—the complete opposite. Most enjoy it because of the ability to listen to or playback recordings," buff" calls, and listen to other areas. Or because they want the public or their family and friends to listen to what they do.

Fun fact: I previously worked as a dispatcher, and the equipment at the facility was outdated and poor, and there was no redundancy. Since I had to coordinate with a lot of other agencies, I had my scanners at home recording everything that I needed to hear at the office. My equipment at home was superior (because I spent a fortune on good equipment) to the equipment at the office and saved me on numerous occasions.

 

[K9KLC]

Isn't there laws against "using" LE transmissions in a crime? Do they enforce it when caught? I HOPE SO.

Things were easier to prosecute however when they had a scanner in the car even in the 80s. (personal experience) Now everyone with a phone can simply close an app out and poof "I ain't doing **** officer", so that's off the table now unless they're really stupid enough to leave the app running when "Mr. or MS. Officer" walks up

Not that it's not "ok", it's the human factor of, if it can be used for bad, it will be. Making things easier for numbskulls usually doesn't turn out well.

Yep that's exactly what's happening.

I wonder how many of these feeds would continue if absolutely nothing was given in return. Would the feed providers still provide them if they had to pay to listen to broadcastify, or anything else? Frankly to me it's just another part of the monitoring hobby, but a part I'll likely never participate in,
All good fodder for thought and debate I suppose.

 

[UTE-GE]

Not once have I heard a negative complaint

I don't mean to pick on you, your friends or anyone else who chooses to stream or what not. AND, I don't mean to take this off topic! Delete if it needed or I will if it goes "south".

But, I find it curious that in my State we are not suppose to have tinted windows and it is enforced with vigor. The reason is, officers feel it's unsafe for them approaching a vehicle. AND I COMPLETELY GET IT. I guess in my simple minded thinking, have the person/people inside roll down the/all windows before being in a precarious position of catching lead. Not all people with tint are bad people.

So, wouldn't that apply to agencies going encrypted so the BG's can't hear their positions and such on a scanner app or such?

Seriously, just a genuine question of curiosity. I'm sure there are many LEO's who would agree or disagree.

 

[PurityControl2]

Unpopular opinion: Agencies should be less concerned with their transmissions being broadcast publicly and be more concerned with being transparent. They should opt to be proactive and host their own feeds as nhfdcadet suggested. There are plenty of agencies across the country that are transparent and have good relations with their respective communities and remain in the clear. Believe it or not, FB does not necessarily pay that much. I doubt the guy is making even close to enough money from FB to live off of (not counting any sort of donations, subscriptions, etc.) Any agency that decides to encrypt based on people like the OP is posting about hosting scanner feeds will ultimately regret that decision in my opinion in the (very) long term after they lose complete trust and support from the public since they adopt the "you will only know what we tell you and want you to know and you will like it" attitude which is exactly what encryption is. Might take many years but eventually I do believe a lot of encrypted agencies will reverse those choices. Anyways, hosting a livestream like that of scanners is no different than hosting a Broadcastify feed with alpha tag or even RID support. Anybody with access to an internet connection can know what agency is transmitting and hear those transmissions. The only difference in this case is the screens are streamed, but so what? What difference does that make? Can't blame the guy at all for wanting to make money off of that, if you can make enough of a living just hosting a livestream of a scanner so be it. The public generally benefits (assuming an agency embraces being in the clear rather than going encrypted) from those streams and can have the situational awareness to know what is going on around them. If you don't want an agency to encrypt, then go to town meetings and voice that. Gather as much public support as you can against it and go that route and hopefully the odds are in your favor. There sure are a lot of gatekeepers on this forum that care only about what they can listen to themselves and believe the public shouldn't be in the know either.

 

[nhfdcadet]

Unpopular opinion: Agencies should be less concerned with their transmissions being broadcast publicly and be more concerned with being transparent. They should opt to be proactive and host their own feeds as nhfdcadet suggested. There are plenty of agencies across the country that are transparent and have good relations with their respective communities and remain in the clear. Believe it or not, FB does not necessarily pay that much. I doubt the guy is making even close to enough money from FB to live off of (not counting any sort of donations, subscriptions, etc.) Any agency that decides to encrypt based on people like the OP is posting about hosting scanner feeds will ultimately regret that decision in my opinion in the (very) long term after they lose complete trust and support from the public since they adopt the "you will only know what we tell you and want you to know and you will like it" attitude which is exactly what encryption is. Might take many years but eventually I do believe a lot of encrypted agencies will reverse those choices. Anyways, hosting a livestream like that of scanners is no different than hosting a Broadcastify feed with alpha tag or even RID support. Anybody with access to an internet connection can know what agency is transmitting and hear those transmissions. The only difference in this case is the screens are streamed, but so what? What difference does that make? Can't blame the guy at all for wanting to make money off of that, if you can make enough of a living just hosting a livestream of a scanner so be it. The public generally benefits (assuming an agency embraces being in the clear rather than going encrypted) from those streams and can have the situational awareness to know what is going on around them. If you don't want an agency to encrypt, then go to town meetings and voice that. Gather as much public support as you can against it and go that route and hopefully the odds are in your favor. There sure are a lot of gatekeepers on this forum that care only about what they can listen to themselves and believe the public shouldn't be in the know either.

how else would the local do-gooders know where to direct their thoughts and prayers?

 

[kc2asb]

Things were easier to prosecute however when they had a scanner in the car even in the 80s. (personal experience) Now everyone with a phone can simply close an app out and poof "I ain't doing **** officer", so that's off the table now unless they're really stupid enough to leave the app running when "Mr. or MS. Officer" walks up

It's been said before - the phone apps were the real game changer. Before that, you were generally tethered to a computer if you wanted to stream Broadcastify. Every phone with the app is a handheld scanner.

 

[K9KLC]

Every phone with the app is a handheld scanner.

Yep and ask yourself this... even as the most honest upright cop, Do you want every Tom,
Dick, and Harry listening to your calls or that perhaps up have to respond to one alone due to no back up or ???

Yes there are unscrupulous cops. I saw it in the mid 80s. But even then when the right situation came up, we went to "tach 2" which was actually on the cb band. Had more privacy there on many occasions and this was before steaming.

Technology has just made it to where even many of the good LEOs want encryption. Those who laugh about a safety issue need to perhaps spend some time on the other side of the badge. We've made our beds about how we monitor, stream or whatever. Now, we'll sleep in them.

 

[BinaryMode]

In my opinion I think the ToS of social media needs to change that bars people from doing this sort of thing. I mean, it's all fun & games until every freaking thing goes full on NSA encrypted. Then what?

Typical Australopithecus-Attentionist. Bipedal, carbon-based and never mindful of the ol' adage, "just because you can, doesn't mean you should."

 

[MrBruce]

So are you saying that the 7,527 feeds us folks are providing thru Broadcastify are not ok and are illegal? Along with all the other streaming platforms that are available?

As far as the LEs being unhappy, sadly now days the LE business has changed so much over the years, and they don't like anyone looking over their shoulders.

There is a difference here, he's not just rebroadcasting it live, he's also earning money from doing it.
Every time you post something on Facebook, that gets a lot of reactions, Meta pays the thief for the content that they rebroadcasted. That is why he's even doing it all. But he is rebroadcasting what he has no legal rights to rebroadcast for income and financial gain.

But answer me this. You own a radio broadcast station, which costs you a lot of money to operate. Someone comes along and rebroadcasts your content, without your permission and they earn a ton of money off of it, while you pay the bills, you get ziltch, nada. Is that okay with you?

Whether it is legal or not in your views, there is a way to stop a lecher, simply put, instead of harassing a mentally ill person who will go ballistic on his Facebook free speech soap box platform, you just simply resort to full encryption radio communications. As I said earlier, I am very familiar with Broadcastify, many people do not know it even exists, how to find it or how it works, and it also has intrusive ads for free platform users.

This clown is live streaming his scanner feeds live in real time, not delayed, not restricted. Everyone knows about Facebook, how it works, where it is and how to use it. He does not care, as long as he's making his Facebook income at the risk that encryption is likely going to be the solution to stopping his misuse and rebroadcasting of the law enforcement radio communications.

It will be his stupidity that he will eventually resort to his social media soapbox crying foul that he has no content left to livestream to make a killing off of. He is the only social media scanner owner in the area who does this live streaming of his scanners. Screen shots from scanner apps is not the same as what he is doing. For a ham operator, he knows what the rules are, he just doesn't care.

When they encrypt, we all lose out, he's just making it all the more likely they will. Discussions are already in the works to do so sooner than we realize.

 

[mmckenna]

When they encrypt, we all lose out, he's just making it all the more likely they will. Discussions are already in the works to do so sooner than we realize.

There are a lot of reasons to encrypt, this is only one. Even without streaming, encryption is coming.

I can understand your frustration, though.

 

[PurityControl2]

There is a difference here, he's not just rebroadcasting it live, he's also earning money from doing it.
Every time you post something on Facebook, that gets a lot of reactions, Meta pays the thief for the content that they rebroadcasted. That is why he's even doing it all. But he is rebroadcasting what he has no legal rights to rebroadcast for income and financial gain.

But answer me this. You own a radio broadcast station, which costs you a lot of money to operate. Someone comes along and rebroadcasts your content, without your permission and they earn a ton of money off of it, while you pay the bills, you get ziltch, nada. Is that okay with you?

Whether it is legal or not in your views, there is a way to stop a lecher, simply put, instead of harassing a mentally ill person who will go ballistic on his Facebook free speech soap box platform, you just simply resort to full encryption radio communications. As I said earlier, I am very familiar with Broadcastify, many people do not know it even exists, how to find it or how it works, and it also has intrusive ads for free platform users.

This clown is live streaming his scanner feeds live in real time, not delayed, not restricted. Everyone knows about Facebook, how it works, where it is and how to use it. He does not care, as long as he's making his Facebook income at the risk that encryption is likely going to be the solution to stopping his misuse and rebroadcasting of the law enforcement radio communications.

It will be his stupidity that he will eventually resort to his social media soapbox crying foul that he has no content left to livestream to make a killing off of. He is the only social media scanner owner in the area who does this live streaming of his scanners. Screen shots from scanner apps is not the same as what he is doing. For a ham operator, he knows what the rules are, he just doesn't care.

When they encrypt, we all lose out, he's just making it all the more likely they will. Discussions are already in the works to do so sooner than we realize.

With that logic, companies like Incident Page Network shouldn't be in business either, since they are essentially "rebroadcasting what they have no legal rights to rebroadcast for income and financial gain." Same with the Broadcastify feeds, they are rebroadcasting 24/7, and BCFY will even pay out to feed providers with gift cards if they hit a certain listener threshold. Flawed logic for sure. I guess every Facebook page that posts scanner calls should be taken down too with that logic. I am glad you aren't the president, and that our freedoms remain mostly intact, if you can call it that. Hop on the bandwagon, start your own page and make some money while you can since according to you encryption is inevitable due to that guy. That's what I'd be doing! Might as well make some easy $$$ in this economy!!