Mesa PD considers switch to full encryption.

[Foresigt]

Even if you have the encryption key, you need something in the radio to decypt it and I doubt any scanner has it since it is illegal for anyne not authorized to received encrypted radio transmissions.

 

[fleef]

I think streaming is our biggest enemy. With the streaming and apps anyone can listen. As scanner hobbyists, we have invested hundreds of dollars to buy scanners to listen and not a $5 or even free app on the phone to listen. If you think public safety isn't aware about streaming and the fact that now anyone can listen easily, you are fooling yourself. I don't get why people want to stream anyways. You spend $700 on a scanner and then you are going to stream it so many people can listen to it for free? Think about it. Wopuld you buy a Porche and then let everyone drive it for free?

I agree with this. I dislike the streaming of public safety frequencies, even if the Broadcastify stream for Phoenix PD is what seems to me eons behind an actual scanner broadcasting. I do not know the actual delay time of Broadcastify's stream. I am aware of broadcast radio's five-second delay in general but when I timed it two years ago I recall the "live police streams" being longer than a "mere" five seconds. If I am not mistaken the stream had a delay of more than one minute. Could have been a glitch, or may be GP but streaming audio feed is far far from actually having a scanner and hearing the live broadcasting. Plus the carrier may completely silence any stream it wants, just like Broadcastify did for several (exciting) news-worthy events certain feeds B'castify felt needed shut down for duration of whatever event was taking place. Even with that, I still believe streaming pub. safety frequencies to me is not a good thing for many reasons, most of them boring reasons at that and nothing new but still my opinion all the same.

 

[K7MFC]

Even with that, I still believe streaming pub. safety frequencies to me is not a good thing for many reasons, most of them boring reasons at that and nothing new but still my opinion all the same.

I don't think these reasons are boring. Can someone explain to me, a non-lawyer, how Broadcastify does not violate any laws regarding divulging the contents of radio transmissions?

Even if this practice is not violating any laws, am I the only one who thinks pofiting off public safety radio transmissions by rebroadcasting them in the internet and putting placing advertisements on them is kinda f'ed up? idk, maybe I'm totally alone in this opinion - I'll shut up about it if I can hear a convincing argument otherwise..

 

[es93546]

I don't think these reasons are boring. Can someone explain to me, a non-lawyer, how Broadcastify does not violate any laws regarding divulging the contents of radio transmissions?

Even if this practice is not violating any laws, am I the only one who thinks pofiting off public safety radio transmissions by rebroadcasting them in the internet and putting placing advertisements on them is kinda f'ed up? idk, maybe I'm totally alone in this opinion - I'll shut up about it if I can hear a convincing argument otherwise..

There is a warning at the top of the page concerning negative comments about "broadcasting scanner audio on the internet." The owner of the site can and does shut down threads. I agree with where this thread is going as I think the topic needs discussion. However, I've learned through experience that some discussions are not allowed. This has certainly taken the wind out of my sails.