Ottawa Players busted on Uber camera badmouthing special team coach

[Deegee]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Is this serious?

Yes. Why is that so hard to comprehend? Good work environments exist out there.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I wonder if there may be a situation here potentially. If somebody at uber overstepped the bounds of the privacy policy, and if there were any repercussions on the career(s) of any of these players, or the coach, then, given the level of salaries of the people involved, damages could be quite substantial. The US is a very litigious society and this reportedly happened there.

They're independent contractors using their own vehicles which legally have a right (in Arizona) to record. There's been driver livestreaming their passengers with little in way of Uber actually doing anything except getting rid of the drivers when they get media attention. As far as I'm aware, there's nothing in Uber policy regarding privacy in the vehicle just collection of data.

I think it would be different in a two-party state as there's always the grey area of if an obvious camera alone is consent enough but in a one-party state, as long as the driver knew it was being recorded (which duh he did) it's perfectly legal.

[Wormius]

If they don’t, Uber should have a policy that unless something criminal transpired or they were given permission, recordings stay private.

[dissentowner]

Poor Sens fans, it is a never ending clown show. You just know Duchene is gonna walk too at the end of the year if they don't trade him and other GM's know it too.

[Matty81]

Regardless of what uber says... Most places have privacy laws that state you can't be recorded without consent... Let alone disclosing the video publicly. Unless you are in a public place.

Dunno if maybe an uber counts as a public place or uber makes ppl sign off on some terms and conditions when you get the app stating you might be recorded?

Bc is basically the only place in NA where ride sharing is illegal. Thought that was so brutal but if uber can legally record and post videos of you... Maybe not.

[Scornfire]

Can we rename them the Ottawa Floridamen?

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Matty81

Regardless of what uber says... Most places have privacy laws that state you can't be recorded without consent... Let alone disclosing the video publicly. Unless you are in a public place.

Dunno if maybe an uber counts as a public place or uber makes ppl sign off on some terms and conditions when you get the app stating you might be recorded?

Bc is basically the only place in NA where ride sharing is illegal. Thought that was so brutal but if uber can legally record and post videos of you... Maybe not.

Arizona requires one party to consent to record the conversation. This recording is perfectly legal although I don't like that it's public.

I just watched the video and Duchene hardly stands out. The guys all seem to be in pretty uniform agreement, especially Wideman and Tierney.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Matty81

Regardless of what uber says... Most places have privacy laws that state you can't be recorded without consent.

No they don't.

There's two-party and one-party states. In one-party states, like Arizona, only one party needs to know the conversation is being recorded.

In two-party states, you need all parties to be aware (not necessarily or usually consent, just aware). However, there's a grey area when it comes to cameras in your face. If a camera isn't hidden, that can be interpreted as consent in some places, in others it's not.

There's certain privacy laws with expectation of privacy, so you can't hide a camera in the washroom or take pictures of people going up the escalators, but that's not the same situation here at all.

And just think of all the Calgary videos on transit, or in public, or pretty much anywhere were the person being recorded doesn't want to be.

[TheScorpion]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1059645820285399040

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Deegee

Yes. Why is that so hard to comprehend? Good work environments exist out there.

I love my job. I'll still bitch about stuff in a private setting. It's perfectly normal

[Matty81]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

No they don't.

There's two-party and one-party states. In one-party states, like Arizona, only one party needs to know the conversation is being recorded.

In two-party states, you need all parties to be aware (not necessarily or usually consent, just aware). However, there's a grey area when it comes to cameras in your face. If a camera isn't hidden, that can be interpreted as consent in some places, in others it's not.

There's certain privacy laws with expectation of privacy, so you can't hide a camera in the washroom or take pictures of people going up the escalators, but that's not the same situation here at all.

And just think of all the Calgary videos on transit, or in public, or pretty much anywhere were the person being recorded doesn't want to be.

I am not familiar with us laws, didnt realize the sens were there. Was thinking Canada. Wow that is brutal privacy legislation... That is not the case here. You need consent to record someone... Like even a doctor for example many people think they have a right to record

The calgary transit stuff, they can record if they've done a privacy review making sure they keep the data safe and have authority to record under some piece of legislation but they could never disclose it unless they have consent or there is a public safety concern or some other express authorization in an act so you're not really at risk there if you're an average joe ripping on your boss.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

What a scummy Uber driver. Like it or not, people badmouth their bosses all the time. Players will say things like this off-the-record and that's why it should stay off-the-record.

Completely breaches the cab drivers sacred oath, I mean selling blow and sexually assaulting passed out drunk chicks is one thing but this crosses a line.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Matty81

I am not familiar with us laws, didnt realize the sens were there. Was thinking Canada. Wow that is brutal privacy legislation... That is not the case here. You need consent to record someone... Like even a doctor for example many people think they have a right to record

Uh, no you do not need consent to record someone. Where do you get that idea?

A doctor, and lawyer, would be special circumstances of which most people are aware they do not have the right to secretly record.

I would, however, 100% be allowed to put my phone in my pocket and have it secretly record a conversation between myself and you. Canada is a one-party jurisdiction.

[jschick88]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1059651779896492034

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Deegee

Yes. Why is that so hard to comprehend? Good work environments exist out there.

So what’s your point? Ottawa should hire a coach that the players respect?

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

So what’s your point? Ottawa should hire a coach that the players respect?

But then the team might be good.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Uh, no you do not need consent to record someone. Where do you get that idea?

A doctor, and lawyer, would be special circumstances of which most people are aware they do not have the right to secretly record.

I would, however, 100% be allowed to put my phone in my pocket and have it secretly record a conversation between myself and you. Canada is a one-party jurisdiction.

But you wouldn’t be able to record someone else’s conversation that doesn’t involve you... like the conversation in the Uber... which is what everyone seems to be referencing

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by jschick88

https://twitter.com/user/status/1059651779896492034

Alley-oop to the Sens for an easy PR win. Say you expect players to challenge coaching staff and themselves to better the organization, and agree the recording and release was not lawful.

[MissTeeks]

From Uber:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1059646890201964544

https://twitter.com/user/status/1059647675287490560

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

But you wouldn’t be able to record someone else’s conversation that doesn’t involve you... like the conversation in the Uber... which is what everyone seems to be referencing

You just need consent of one of the parties involved in the communication. If you're sitting less than a foot away from someone, you can easily make the case that your part of the conversation. The Senators would need to argue that it was a private conversation that was not intended to be heard by the Uber driver. That would not hold up.

Furthermore, even in a two-party jurisdiction, an obvious camera (assuming it wasn't tampered with to appear off when it was on) would possibly hold up.