Re: store system w 4-8 cameras ?

["Bob Worthy" <securinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Nomen Nescio" <nobody@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:65e4acec3a498775669819d027193727@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Bob Worthy said:
> You're making this way more complicated than it really is.  If it's a
video
> of a holdup, the victim can testify that the video, watermarked or not,
> accurately shows what happened.  He knows, because he was there.  If it's
a
> video of a nighttime burglary, then the video better be able to show the
> perps well enough for the jury to be convinced the defendant did it.
>
> Watermarking only enters the picture if there is some question that the
> video accurately shows what happened.  That is a question for the judge,
> not the jury:  the judge decides whether the video evidence is reliable
> enough for the jury to even see it.
>
> The defense lawyer needs some reasonable basis for saying the video is
> wrong.  He can't just say, "I think somebody edited the video, prove they
> didn't."  He also can't claim that space aliens impersonated his client
and
> robbed the bank, rather than his client, and then dare the prosecutor to
> prove it didn't happen that way.
>
> So the only way watermarking is ever going to be an issue is if a defense
> lawyer can convince a judge that there is a reasonable possibility someone
> tampered with the video.  Now, if George Lucas is out to get you, he can
> probably produce watermarked video  proving that you shot JFK.  But in
real
> life, I don't see a bad guy getting off by claiming somebody altered the
> video.  How would he prove that's a reasonable enough possibility for the
> jury to even consider?

Ok....so even though the watermarking tool would be looked at "prior" to the
video even being intoduced as evidence, by both parties, to make sure no one
ends up with egg on their face, is it your opinion that watermarking has no
place in the world of video recording because it is useless, or is it based
on your choice to use a device that doesn't produce a watermark? Recorded
video is used for many other purposes than hold-ups and burglarys and there
are many instances that people have access to the equipment where tampering
may be a question. I am not talking convienence stores here. Think along the
lines of major corporate security, the life of the rich and famous,
exclusive hotels and resorts, casinos, the diamond districts, government, oh
yes, government, millions/billions in asset protection, areas where internal
theft is not out of the question, cover-ups that are becoming the norm,
etc., to name a few. Where are the safequards, that extra layer of
protection, the tools that may be needed? I know we don't all operate in
these markets, so I guess the need equals the arena we are dealing in. Maybe
you think I am watching to much TV but a little exposure to some of this
(actual experience and there are those here that know some of what I do)
will open ones eyes to how little we really know about what goes on out
there. If you think this is over the top..that's ok too, just pointing out
there is another world out there besides the eco line of 4 cameras and a
recorder watching some steal some candy bars, where I agree, watermarking
doesn't mean squat.  :o]