[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message Index][Thread Index]
On 7/2/2009 7:08 AM, G. Morgan wrote:
> Bob Worthy wrote:
>> Secondly, a court is more than likely going to want video that is
>> watermarked if it is going to be used as evidence. Think about that before
>> selecting recording equipment.
> Bob, have you ever personally known of a case where video was denied
> admissibility or it's authenticity was in question because of a lack of a
Bob didn't say a thing about it being admissible or not. A watermark
(visible or otherwise) certainly helps if there's a challenge of the
video's authenticity, but I hardly think any court would rule it
inadmissible simply on the lack of a watermark.
alt.security.alarms Main Index |
alt.security.alarms Thread Index |
alt.security.alarms Home |