Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwawayatty | Hacker News Reader

(Attorney here, but this is not legal advice.)

It would be a very unusual circumstance for a person caught on camera performing a criminal act to incriminate him/herself by admitting guilt for the purpose of prevailing on a right-to-publicity action.

Moreover, every case involving right to publicity/right of likeness thus far has had a "famous" person as the plaintiff, where there's a sort of "brand goodwill" in the person's likeness and that goodwill is being misappropriated specifically to recommend or endorse a product. That's not the case here, for sure.

View on HN

> It would be a very unusual circumstance for a person caught on camera performing a criminal act

But the person wasn’t caught on camera performing a criminal act afaics. She was caught walking between two cars and pulling at a door handle, the car was locked, person continued. Is this criminal? Kids do that all the time.

It’s alleged that the person did perform a criminal act elsewhere but was not caught on camera.

The point is that this person would have to sue. There is no district attorney or third party that would sue Amazon for this action.

So it is a calculated risk that they won't sue, absolving Amazon of any actual negative consequence.

> So it is a calculated risk that they won't sue, absolving Amazon of any actual negative consequence.

If that’s the standard that legal and ok gets measured on, yes, then that’s likely legal and ok.

So perhaps this is a suspect due to other factors that aren't mentioned. Maybe the location of this video is near other documented break-ins and it fits a profile.

Yes, possibly. That would make it fine for law enforcement to use it. That doesn’t make it fine for a for-profit company to use it in advertising.

Attempted burglary is a crime.

Now, if you can prove that. I’ve pulled on door handles of cars that I believed to be mine. I’ve tried to enter apartments and hotel rooms because I took the wrong floor. The acts described in the video certainly look suspicious, but as a stand-alone video are a bit low as standards for convictions should go.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com