Techdirt. Stories filed under "farms" Easily digestible tech news... http://www.techdirt.com/ en-us Techdirt. Stories filed under "farms"http://www.techdirt.com/images/td-88x31.gifhttp://www.techdirt.com/ Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:48:00 PDT States Continue To Make Photographing Or Taping Farms A Crime Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130410/01513722653/states-continue-to-make-photographing-taping-farms-crime.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130410/01513722653/states-continue-to-make-photographing-taping-farms-crime.shtml photograph farms without permission. The bill tried to position it as "protecting farm intellectual property," but everyone knew the real reason: farmers were upset about animal rights activists photographing and videotaping animal cruelty and revealing it to the world. We hadn't heard much more about that until just recently. A month and a half ago, On the Media had a segment about how these kinds of bills were showing up in more states, and now the NY Times has done a big article on how these "ag-gag" laws are being pushed by lobbyists heavily influenced by big farm groups.

It appears that the positioning of these bills has moved away from "protecting farmer IP" and over to claiming that animal rights activists are involved in terrorism for exposing animal cruelty. Now, we certainly believe that some animal rights groups go way overboard in their campaigns, though they often just make themselves look silly when they do so. But these laws just seem crazy, and a clear restriction on First Amendment rights.
But a dozen or so state legislatures have had a different reaction: They proposed or enacted bills that would make it illegal to covertly videotape livestock farms, or apply for a job at one without disclosing ties to animal rights groups. They have also drafted measures to require such videos to be given to the authorities almost immediately, which activists say would thwart any meaningful undercover investigation of large factory farms.
ALEC (the American Legislative Exchange Council), a group famous for writing legislation for members of Congress, has a "draft bill" along these lines, which argues that the effort is to prevent attempts to use images and video to "defame the facility or its owner." That's insulting. First off, we already have defamation laws. If farm owners are defamed, let them use those laws. Second, truth is an absolute defense to defamation, and if they're taking a picture that accurately represents what's going on, it's difficult to see how that could, in any way, be any form of defamation. Third, and most importantly, just because one might use some tactic to defame someone (even if it's highly unlikely) that's no excuse, at all, for seeking to ban the activity entirely.

In the end, it's legal efforts like this that make people especially cynical about the political process. It's pretty clear that there's no good reason for such laws. Rather, the entire purpose is to protect some farmers who don't want their practices exposed.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> because-farmers http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130410/01513722653 Mon, 28 Feb 2011 09:41:19 PST New Legislation 'To Protect Farmer IP' Would Make It A Felony To Photograph Farms Mike Masnick http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110226/12463213279/new-legislation-to-protect-farmer-ip-would-make-it-felony-to-photograph-farms.shtml http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110226/12463213279/new-legislation-to-protect-farmer-ip-would-make-it-felony-to-photograph-farms.shtml put people in jail for taking a photograph of a farm without permission. Seriously. Not surprisingly, the "excuse" for this is that it is "needed to protect the property rights of farmers and the "intellectual property" involving farm operations." I'm not kidding. The bill was introduced by Florida State Senator Jim Norman from Tampa. It's apparently targeted at animal rights activists, who have been known to photograph questionable conditions of animals on farms. In other words, it has nothing to do with "protecting intellectual property." It's to avoid criticism for treating animals poorly. And, of course, if animal activists are trespassing to get these photos, there are already laws against that. But this is what you get in this kind of society, where people seem to project the idea that anything can be redefined as "property" and locked up -- people use "intellectual property" as an excuse for simply ridiculous legislative proposals such as this one. Even if such a law passes, it won't take long for it to be declared unconstitutional, but it could waste Florida taxpayer money to fight this in court.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]> oh-come-on http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20110226/12463213279