Flock cameras should be illegal, and it would be better if they were all destroyed.
They do so much damage to privacy. There's no way these things should exist.
Flock cameras should be illegal, and it would be better if they were all destroyed.
They do so much damage to privacy. There's no way these things should exist.
Maybe it’s the cameras themselves that are the privacy concern, hmm?
As a polite reminder there's a map of these cameras and if you see a camera not on the map, you can add it.
Its an app called deflock and its on github. There's also a group called deflock to further expose them. They've called them domestic terrorist.
Ah, their website says the app is coming soon. Didn't even think to check GitHub. Thanks!
You can add it to Obtanium to keep it updated as well. Obtaniun is an awesome app that let's you add all repositories to it and it keeps the app updated whenever a new version is added to github.
Bloody hell, I knew they were around, but not that they had rolled out that much already.
Nothing in my area it seems, phew!
Yeah that's what I thought too, I added 4. Ugh. Keep your eyes open!
What do they look like?
deflock.me has photos.
Link doesn’t work for me
Deflock.me you might have to copy/paste. But if you clicked it right after I posted it, I I had an extra letter in there, it's fixed.
The ruling came after the cities of Sedro Woolley and Stanwood sued Jose Rodriguez in civil court to block his records requests. Both cities have since turned off their Flock camera systems.
Great outcome
Not "Public Domain". That has a specific meaning in copyright law. It's about creative works that are owned by the public and not subject to copyright.
What the judge decided is that their outputs are Public Records: "qualified as public records subject to the state's Public Records Act".
lol, stick a couple in a police union hall and see how fast the privacy walls go up.
Hell yeah Washington State. Let's hope that Cascades through the rest of the pnw
I may have misread but it seems the article says the records are qualify as public records and so can be requested by anyone.
That's not the same thing as public domain, unless I'm mistaken.
Yes, it's different.
Public records can be public domain. Public domain works can be requested with a public record request. Not all public record requests will result in public domain licensed documents being released.
What are some (legitimate) examples where public records can't be released?
I said public domain licensed documents may not be released, not public records, though it's true there are cases where public records can't be released.
So for example, if the government hosts an event and makes posters for it, where the whole poster is a piece of stock imagery that they've licensed for the event with a little text on top, you can file a public records request for "all promotional materials related to X" event, and you'll get a photo scan of that poster.
...but the stock photo is not public domain, thus you can't just copy that poster and use it yourself, because you don't own the rights.
Public record, not public domain. The license of the work or its components is separate from the legal classification of that work as a public record or not.
However, yes, there are also legitimate examples when public records can't be released.
For example, you have the right to request things like body cam footage from local police departments. But if that department is doing a long-term undercover operation, they can't be releasing all the bodycam footage until that operation is over, otherwise they'd reveal the identity of the undercover officer.
You can also make a public records request for essentially anything, though. So there are instances where the request is simply unreasonable and will never get fulfilled, because people are simply making public record requests for things that aren't considered public records.
If you wanted to request some documents about how the military is purchasing certain types of goods, you can probably get that, but you'll find it hard to get the exact GPS coordinates of every military base and nuclear silo we have, because that would make them incredibly easy to target by an adversary.
You can request certain correspondences by a government employee if they're deemed relevant to your request and not dangerous to release, but requesting a full copy of every employee at the DOJ's email inboxes would probably not be a reasonable request given data sensitivity, for example.
I do like like them, these anti privacy pieces of shit.
I do not like these flock cameras. I do not like them one bit.
I couldn't reach the article so I found another one from the Everett Herald https://www.heraldnet.com/news/judge-denies-request-to-exempt-flock-footage-from-public-records-act/
Why is the community that is posted in someone's home address?
Read the sidebar for the community. The person started it because they had multiple break-ins at that address. The person was an outspoken police critic, so the cops refused to do anything about it. They started the community to document all of it, and it eventually became a place for them to document more generalized police abuses and authoritarianism.
I wonder if there’s fewer around my area because there’s a local vendor doing the same thing. Their building is fairly prominent and is surrounded by cameras.
Worth noting that:
https://denverite.com/2025/10/27/bow-mar-flock-cameras-accusation/
As a polite reminder there's a map of these cameras and if you see a camera not on the map, you can add it.
If it's public, does that mean you can request other people's data as well?
Yes, exactly.
This is the point of a Public Records law, that it works similarly to a FOIA request... the data is public because the state operates those cams, least they can do is show you what they know.
Oh, is it concerning how much they know?
Well, at least you know what they know, as opposed to not knowing what they know.
WA has state wide initiatives, presumably it would not be too difficult to just attempt a direct vote to ban or otherwise regulate this level/volume of broad surveillance.
all 49 comments