Legality of RadioReference Live Audio Broadcasts and Archives

[Jay911]

So those of you who reply in a weak, uneducated attempt to defend a scanner website you should really put yourself in the position of a cop and how you would feel if the criminal element was listening to your every move. Nit picking the alert will change change the fact that police are aware of RR and the smartphone apps, and therefore move forward with switching to full encryption. Lindsey runs a business and of course will make some sort of attempt to try to defend his product. To him it is about the bottom dollar not safety. As long as the money keeps lining his wallet no changes will be made even if it costs a officer his/her life.

1. I reply as a firefighter who runs an official, department-run feed for my emergency service. Both my firefighters and the general public (and the media) use my feed for monitoring my FD's activities. There is a delay of at least 30 seconds on the feed because of the inherent latency of the Internet.

2. I also reply as a very experienced scanner user with well over 20 years' involvement in the use of scanners to listen to public safety services. Agencies in this area have not fallen into the clichéd trap of "the public can't hear what you're doing or you will be compromising your safety!!11!one!!!eleven!1". In fact, one law-enforcement agency near me routinely uses the scanner users listening to it as an adjunct in their work.

3. These audio feeds were on other sites and have been propagating around the Internet long before RadioReference started hosting them, so your argument that RR is behind this just "to line Lindsay's pockets" is a hollow one (not to mention that there are other people who directly admin the live audio portion of the site, and the admins have put in several steps to ensure that truly sensitive information is kept off live audio feeds). But your argument does match pretty closely the same old tired lines repeated every so often by trolls from a certain other website.. and far as I know they haven't been heard from in a while. Maybe it works in cycles, like solar storms?...

 

[AK9R]

From what I've observed here, and I obviously haven't listened to every feed, but the ones I have listened to scan multiple agencies/frequencies/talkgroups. That, combined with the delay, makes it in my opinion improbable that such a "tool" could be used in the commission of a crime with any decent rate of success.

Yours is an informed opinion. However, the law enforcement officials making decisions about encrypting their comms because of scanner apps and on-line feeds may not be as informed as you are. Your logic, no matter how valid, doesn't matter if the local police chief makes a knee-jerk decision to encrypt their comms in an effort to thwart criminals who might be able to gain an advantage by listening to a feed.

I'm firmly on the fence about all this. I don't believe their's anything illegal about providing feeds or loading a scanner app on my phone as long as I don't use the information obtained to aid criminal activity. But, I can certainly see how law enforcement may take an opposite position and encrypt more comms because of these feeds.

 

[KC1UA]

Yours is an informed opinion. However, the law enforcement officials making decisions about encrypting their comms because of scanner apps and on-line feeds may not be as informed as you are. Your logic, no matter how valid, doesn't matter if the local police chief makes a knee-jerk decision to encrypt their comms in an effort to thwart criminals who might be able to gain an advantage by listening to a feed.

Oh I couldn't agree more. And that's the sad part. I'm not sure it would ever be possible, on a wide scale anyway, to make that clear. I'd expect that not even live demonstrations of these apps vs. their own radio systems would make a difference to some of them. It's clear that some of them do get it, but equally clear that a majority does not, and never will short of some incredible undertaking that I doubt even this website could succeed at.

As stated above though, I ran my feeds for years on my own platforms as well as various others prior to providing them here, so while RR has certainly made scanner feeds far more publicized and available than they ever have been, blaming RR for their existence is an "uninformed opinion"...in my opinion.

 

[JokeInsurance]

I want to thank Lindsay for posting this information. It will surely help me once I am ready to start hosting.

 

[radioman2001]

I copied this from the other locked post, otherwise it would be lost in the twilight zone

Obviously someone needs to talk to their radio shop, since the officers and the author of this document believes that their channels are secure, when they are not. This is a common misconception among law enforcement when they go digital. Plus it brings up shortcomings of the departments policy and the officers of transmitting time sensitive information over the radio when in pursuit or during an investigation.
I am going to go out on a limb here, in that as usual the government wants to limit civilian rights so THEY can feel secure, rather than fix the problem which is the radio (encryption which I don't believe in) officer's common sense ( which would fix all the problems) and the courts dealing with the criminal.

BTW the information came from a site similar to Wikileaks,
Public Intelligence
Take a look at it. Some of the info is pretty scary in how we are being prepped for basting. Particularly look at how DHS in now going to use analysis on the general public to try and root out terrorists. My idea of leaving the U.S. when I retire is looking more and more likely.

 

[SCPD]

Lindsey is indeed laying a smackdown. A smackdown against cops by letting criminals have the uppper hand. To all of you who commeneted on the document I posted, you are idiots. This was distributed to every LE agency in the state of Maryland. The events in the bulletin really ocurred, and RR is mentioned specifically. RR supports all these apps. The live audio comes from RR. All of you can defend him as best you can because you like scanners, but the sad fact is the live audio feed is forcing agencies to convert to encryption. Dozens of municpalties have or are in the process of going encryption. As long as these feed supported apps exist police will continue to go secure and leave us in the dark. In fact I just sold 10 encryp boards to a local PD and the Lt. stated to me he wanted them because of RR. This alert was not issued based on misinformation or lies, it was issued due to facts and the life threatning danger that RR and the apps pose to police officer everyday. So those of you who reply in a weak, uneducated attempt to defend a scanner website you should really put yourself in the position of a cop and how you would feel if the criminal element was listening to your every move. Nit picking the alert will change change the fact that police are aware of RR and the smartphone apps, and therefore move forward with switching to full encryption. Lindsey runs a business and of course will make some sort of attempt to try to defend his product. To him it is about the bottom dollar not safety. As long as the money keeps lining his wallet no changes will be made even if it costs a officer his/her life.

I find this interesting,you complain about Lindsey lining his pockets,you sir are doing the same but complain about it,I do not see where listening to a scanner causes any officer's safety issue.If this is the problem everyone needs to retake a communications course and learn what not to say over the air.Furthermore in my area we have what police think are"private" channels because some radio shop programmed them into a radio for them to use without a license but is easy to find,if you listen it is usually a channel to BS on or talk about someone thinking no one can hear them.

I will concur there is a need for sensitive communications at times on encrypted and have no problem with that.I myself like listening in times of severe weather to get a on scene report as to where a tornado or other weather threat is located.I do not think there is so much important traffic over the air as to warrant encryption.I will tell you before you run your mouth I am a former Police Chief and officer so I am not a thrill seeker there is a place for different forms of communication in law enforcement.

I will in fact say we did capture fleeing suspects by local scanner users calling dispatch to inform them where a suspect was after hearing it on the scanner.i also like to know when a escapee is on the loose in my area before hearing it on the 6 o'clock news.I had a instance where a officer needed help and would be home listening and back up that officer myself.I will also tell you before repeaters were popular I have know cases of the public hearing a officer in distress and call the police dept and get him help,so before you start spouting the negatives about scanner users you need to rethink your thoughts.

The fact you sell the encryption boards must mean you sell radios so you have the means to listen so quit complaining about scanner users you are in business to sell radios and line you pockets.

 

[zerg901]

From "slash" on 12-21-2011

More importantly, there are no constitutional protections to own a scanner or computer device that can listen in on public safety communications in real time. The only thing you have the privilege to is a FOIA request after the fact, and even that is on shaky ground.

-----------------------------------

I think that in the USA that everything is legal unless it is specifically deemed to be illegal. (I dont know if that is common law based or constitutionally based - I aint a lawyer)

 

[blantonl]

FYI, we receive the following message from the Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center:

Attached was removed per the request of the Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center's message to be below:

To whom it may concern,

I am writing in reference to a Law Enforcement Sensitive document that was posted on your website. On January 1 of this year, RadioReference.com user wten77 posted a bulletin, concerning radio feeds provided by your website, which was issued by the Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center. This user did not have permission to post the document, which is a requirement of our center’s non-disclosure agreement. This document contained information that is not intended to be released to the public.

I am requesting the document, titled Officer (1).pdf, be removed from your site. I will be happy to discuss my request should you have any questions, and may be reached by response to this e-mail or at the telephone number listed below.

Thank you.

xxxxxx
Assistant Director, PPRD
Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center

We removed the document that wten77 posted.

 

[slash]

An open letter to the police officers, federal and state law makers, and three letter federal agencies who are reading this thread with great interest:

Whatever actions you intend on taking, legislative or otherwise, please keep in mind that traditional scanner users, particularly amateur radio operators, who have their own equipment to listen in and DON'T broadcast on this site have very, very rarely used their equipment to break laws or assist others in breaking laws.

So please, don't be out to blame everyone or turn on encryption to end this hobby for everyone because of the foolishness of a few thousand who enable tens of thousands to listen in with their computers or smart phones.

It's not right and unfair that the feed providers and administrators voluntarially create an environment punish the police and jeopardize the public's safety by claiming that it's THEIR fault if communications are broadcasted on a primary dispatch channel, whether its required for inter-agency communications or lack of frequency allocation.

There are many positive aspects to have an informed public, but that's always been traditional among amateur radio operators and most scanner owners in the USA. Encryption is not the solution, going after anyone accused of a crime with a smart phone isn't the solution, going after this site and those who recklessly put this information over the internet with no delay is. Don't turn on encryption, that will only end up waging a war against the angry engineers and hackers who will simply end up reverse engineering it and listening in illegally. It's inevitable, even your APCO-25 encryption has been broken. All those avenues end up with a never ending cat and mouse game while simultaneously betraying the public's trust.

By all means, enact laws and enforce existing ones (depending on where you are) and go after these feed providers and administrators and leave the traditional scanner owners and listeners alone. Some of the pro-live-audio-feed people have no interest in self-restraint by providing delayed feeds, some would, if they were provided the tools to do so.

This site paid its bills for many years on frequency database subscriptions before live audio came along. It was and is a bad idea from the beginning and there are many on this site, including former providers who are not happy with the status quo.

If there's any current feed provider who is having second thoughts, a small subscription fee to support this site's operation of the forums, frequency database and non-public safety feeds, is far cheaper than the potential legal costs when the laws catch up with you.

 

[KC1UA]

I don't know about anyone else, but I think it's nice to see the tin foil hat crowd jump into this thread and provide their unique insight. It's good that they've chosen now to do so because I fear this thread will be closed long before the Mayan calendar expires.... :roll:

I'd comment further but I have to go check the status of my 5 feeds....

 

[mule1075]

1.Ok can you please tell me what as i am not a ham and have been listening to a scanner for almost 30 years what is a traditional scanner user.

2.Can you also tell me where you say This site has paid it bills on on its freq database subscriptions which is not correct.Am i a premium subscriber yes but nobody forced me to do it but ME.And for reasons that are none of your concern is why.But if i am correct which i think i am you do not have to pay a dime if you use this for any info you might need.The database for all US States,Canada and overseas still work for me not logged in as the live feeds which i do not have to log in to listen either are available to me also.So please if you can elaborate more on this having to pay for services rendered subject i will gladly listen to your ideas and or misconceptions.

3.The whole live feed thing has been going on since the dawn of the internet.

Now if i read your post wrong i apologize.Adam

 

[slash]

1.Ok can you please tell me what as i am not a ham and have been listening to a scanner for almost 30 years what is a traditional scanner user.

If you own a scanner and use it when you listen, you're a traditional scanner user. All hams are pretty much scanner users except they have transceivers with special frequencies they can transmit on, and depending on where you live, have extra legal protections and privileges. Consider getting your license - it's great if you travel and the test isn't really that hard, even if you have no intentions to buy any ham radio gear.

2.Can you also tell me where you say This site has paid it bills on on its freq database subscriptions which is not correct.Am i a premium subscriber yes but nobody forced me to do it but ME.And for reasons that are none of your concern is why.But if i am correct which i think i am you do not have to pay a dime if you use this for any info you might need.

No, subscriptions are voluntary and (I presume) ad revenues paid for this site's operation since its inception. Purchasing a database subscription opens up a few extra features and is a gesture of supporting the site's original mission.

3.The whole live feed thing has been going on since the dawn of the internet.

Not nearly to the extent that this site has offered unified by a common API for software developers. The smart phone developers are making hundreds of thousands, if not millions, off the sales of programs that utilize this site's live audio platform that allow smart phone users to listen in on live public safety feeds.

 

[KC1UA]

I'm sure someone will take offense to my tin foil post...probably the person that typed directly above it, so let me follow up with this...

1. Some people in this thread clearly have too much time on their hands given their acute over-analysis of this so called "issue".

2. I expect a good percentage of those individuals have some case of the a$$ for RR in some way shape or form and are using this as a platform to vent their frustrations.

3. Why not accept these feeds for what they are to say 98% of the people that listen to them...entertainment and information.

4. The other 2% that may want to use them in an illicit manner will find varying levels of success/failure because AGAIN:
a. They have no means of manipulating the feed to stop and hold on a specific talkgroup or frequency .
b. The feeds do have a delay (anyone that thinks otherwise is clearly NOT listening).

5. I will agree that anyone providing an unofficial single channel dedicated feed for a department should have their feed shut down, and that such feeds should only be provided by the department itself.

6. Along that line, anyone streaming any covert/surveillance/TAC channels and/or talkgroups should remove them from their feeds.

7. Slash, you're another person that is trying to take something away from the 98% who are law abiding citizens because of the 2% of jerks that do their best to ruin it for everyone else. NOT a good solution.

8. It should be noted that my 98% vs 2% numbers are hypothetical (common sense folks will get the idea) and that they were not cooked up beneath any tin foil hat.

Relax folks, and have fun. Good God....it's a freakin' HOBBY.

 

[mule1075]

If you own a scanner and use it when you listen, you're a traditional scanner user. All hams are pretty much scanner users except they have transceivers with special frequencies they can transmit on, and depending on where you live, have extra legal protections and privileges. Consider getting your license - it's great if you travel and the test isn't really that hard, even if you have no intentions to buy any ham radio gear.



No, subscriptions are voluntary and (I presume) ad revenues paid for this site's operation since its inception. Purchasing a database subscription opens up a few extra features and is a gesture of supporting the site's original mission.



Not nearly to the extent that this site has offered unified by a common API for software developers. The smart phone developers are making hundreds of thousands, if not millions, off the sales of programs that utilize this site's live audio platform that allow smart phone users to listen in on live public safety feeds.

..............

 

[slash]

Slash, you're another person that is trying to take something away from the 98% who are law abiding citizens because of the 2% of jerks that do their best to ruin it for everyone else. NOT a good solution.

Relax folks, and have fun. Good God....it's a freakin' HOBBY.

No sir, that's not the case at all. If you through read all my posts in this thread, I've cited examples that show this goes beyond affecting just law abiding citizens, and have provided an easy solution of implementing a 15 minute delay that should quash just about every agency's concern.

I've talked to police leaders who currently don't have encrypted channels who are now having second thoughts BECAUSE of this site providing easy access to listen to law enforcement communication to those who otherwise wouldn't, NOT because they have anything against traditional scanner listeners who typically haven't been a problem.

Some police are mad enough that in some areas of the country they are taking it out against anyone with a smart phone and a police scanner app, or the more paranoid ones who squash the entire (legal) hobby via wasting money on encryption. Just because it might not be happening in your own back yard doesn't mean it isn't happening somewhere else. Take what wten77 has repeatedly said in this thread very seriously. He's right on.

I wish I could relax, but I know the outcomes of this, and encryption is NOT good for the hobby. Several LE agencies, state and federal nationwide are mad as hell at this website's live audio platform, and that's a fact even supported by the internal law enforcement memo wten77 posted.

The ball is ultimately in blantonl's court, yet so far he has scoffed at and ignored the issue. Seriously, a minute to a minute and a half delay as justification to have these feeds up? Try 15 minutes, the large overall majority of listners will not complain, guaranteed. If people want to take the hobby seriously and buy a scanner to listen in real time, the links to ScannerMaster on this site are already there.

 

[Jay911]

Slash: I rely on a relatively short delay to permit my out-of-range-of-RF-signal members to know about the calls our emergency response agency is on and make the determination on whether or not to break away from work, errands, etc., to come back up the duty crew. Can you give me an idea of how adding a 15-30 minute delay to my feed will not throw that into complete disarray?

 

[slash]

Slash: I rely on a relatively short delay to permit my out-of-range-of-RF-signal members to know about the calls our emergency response agency is on and make the determination on whether or not to break away from work, errands, etc., to come back up the duty crew. Can you give me an idea of how adding a 15-30 minute delay to my feed will not throw that into complete disarray?

Simple: Make it closed and not available to the general public, you don't need this site to do this.

blantonl has plans to do this here as was announced (if I recall correctly over a year ago) with the premium live audio feed option, but intends to charge feed providers $15 a month for that functionality. It still hasn't been implemented. But it's taken far too long and I haven't even heard of a beta test being done.

 

[KC1UA]

I notice that you don't acknowledge the inescapable fact that there is no control over these feeds by a user when listening via a smartphone app.

We'll agree to disagree all day long on this. A crook will do far better with a scanner if he/she wants to monitor the police while conducting B&E's. I think that because of the availability and use of smartphone scanner apps is such a hot topic right now, that simple fact has been forgotten. So...why don't we just get back to basics and ban scanners too?

I think the hype and misinformation about smartphone scanner apps has blown this entire topic WAY out of proportion. I wish there was a way to educate these agencies on the true nature and lack of end-user manipulation of these apps.

 

[RadioFlyer2012]

Perhaps I might be a little confused. Reading online I noticed that 911 dispatch centers, alarm system companies, and other sorts of serious nature conversations are sent to police mobile computers, or vehicles radios with cellular data capability. It is a separate form of encrypted communication altogether. Personally scanning a few public safety channels I found exactly that, nothing of a serious nature over the air. I guess Im just trying to understand how people are saying that this gives criminals the advantage lol. Perhaps someone can enlighten me to these superior cool crazy channels lol.

 

[Jay911]

Simple: Make it closed and not available to the general public, you don't need this site to do this.

It would appear I neglected to mention I have no interest in keeping the general public from listening to our radio comms. We have no concerns about letting anyone hear what we're saying, because I train my staff that saying something on the radio is like standing on the truck hollering it through a megaphone. Everyone can hear it. Anything that has to be discreet is done through some other method.

And the local police, as I said earlier in this thread, behave much the same way. They even enlist scanner users regularly for assistance by calling out to them on the general patrol frequency. Anything they have to say that is not meant for public consumption is done over either telephone or encrypted "side" channels (with varying forms of encryption - not (just) digital modulation).

It will be hard to convince me that there's any reason to vilify either RadioReference or the previous audio feed sites in this regard. As mentioned above, anyone can go to various consumer electronics stores and get scanners, including ones with all the known radio systems in North America pre-programmed. Prior to that particular concept, books like Police Call existed. RR is not "enabling the criminal element" any more than Radio Shack is.