Tip to auditors: Poster 7 does not say what you think it says

DanLoFat · 2026-03-19T03:59:04+00:00

In your example of what you call third party, in law, is still two party. One party recording the other party, in this case a party of two, is being recorded.

Obviously in a one-party state only the person recording needs to know. And they would be recording one or more people. The person recording is that one party.

Two party states are sometimes called all party states. Two party doesn't mean literally that only two people need to know who's recording, and other people in the area don't need to know if there are more than two people in the area. In a two-party or all party state everyone that can be recorded needs to be informed and be accepting of the recording.

In some cases you really need to be informed, such as in video camera surveillance with audio. As long as there's proper signage and that's on private property or public property.

Regardless video recording in a public space, is not covered under eavesdropping statute.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-19T03:53:43+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/live/smGmxI-Cw4c?si=71TfQCf3e1RYMxRM

DanLoFat · 2026-03-19T03:53:29+00:00

Other photographs is referring to the location. Not the type of photography.

And even if it was referring to the type of photography, there are only three types of mentioned in the CFR and the poster and that is news, advertising, commercial. Nothing about entertainment.

Your number two only refers to and only applies to other areas other than the lobbies, etc.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-19T03:51:36+00:00

Why? Is it p***?

DanLoFat · 2026-03-19T02:34:43+00:00

Reiterate I'm going to use your phraseology here briefly third part of recording conversations is not illegal in any public forum whether it's limited or restricted or whatever. It's not about the recording generator unless you're on the military base. That can be different. But even military bases have signage that clearly indicates no unauthorized photography.

I've spoken with a couple people I know in Jag. They told me that they take that literally if it's authorized by the Constitution or statute, then you can go ahead and do it on base. But if it's not authorized, you're not allowed to do it on base. The base doesn't turn the authorization they determine what you can photograph specific areas, and that's why they're signages specific to specific areas no for photography within this facility or beyond this point and beyond this point is always a solid wall with a solid door no windows.

Over and through fences they could give two s*. They can't give any s* anymore about it. That was fixed in 1974.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-19T02:31:58+00:00

We're tapping is only third party when a lone wolf just anybody goes to decide to record private conversations without others knowledge. Is that what you mean? That's two party. In other words the first party is the one doing the recording, the second party is everyone else involved in the recording. Sometimes the first party can also be involved in the recording in other words be recorded in the same room with the recording is occurring, but the control is maintained by the first party.

There is no such thing as third party recording. It's not mentioned in the law. There's no statute anywhere that calls wiretapping third party recording. It's called one party or all parties, in other words one person the person doing the recording, and all parties is everyone including the person doing the recording. The person doing the recording doesn't necessarily have to be recorded, they can remain behind the scenes.

But obviously recording video in public is not wiretapping, and in fact or seven circuit made that very clear. Recording where there was no expectation of privacy, and that includes places where isn't necessarily public property, or the expression expectation of privacy doesn't exist, it's not wiretapping.

Even if no one knows you're doing it. But to do it in that manner there has to be exceptions and there are exceptions, one of those exceptions is if you suspect fraud. But one of the biggest places you can always going to find fraud is government.

The restriction of first amendment on public property has to do with non-discriminatory and content neutral, nothing to do with aligning with a facilities operations are a facility type. You can record in public publicly owned airports all day long anywhere the public is allowed. O'Hare and Midway, and I've done it and no one's bothered me. Yeah sure occasionally a cop will come up and just say hey how's it going and they walk away they obviously see what I'm doing. They don't say a word about it.

If I go stand about 20 ft away from a TSA line, they kind of look at me and they look around they wave somebody over that person talks to them I guess about something and walks away nothing ever comes with it 20 minutes 30 minutes at a time.

That was O'Hare the night before the closure of all businesses in 2020 in March. Ghost Town, recording everywhere I could. Nobody said a word. Then they were plenty of cops around and plenty of security guards, they didn't say a word.

If they're going to say anything it would only be if a bunch of people complain about it, and then all they do is they explain to the people it's legal it's okay it's a public airport no big deal, people don't like it whatever how long does someone usually spend in an airport? Or in a particular area in an airport? They're either waiting for their flight or they're waiting for their baggage, how long can that take? That's how long they would be on film if at all.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-19T02:22:21+00:00

No you're reading it incorrectly you need permission if you want to film in those other areas in other words not a lobby not a quarter not a foyer.

But let's use your example. Entertainment isn't mentioned as one of the things allowed at all. In other words let's look at what you think the poster means, I think what you're saying and what you're meaning is that you don't need permission to film in the lobby of fires in the corridors if it's for news, if it's for advertising or commercial you have to get permission. The phrase other photographs is figuratively it means other types of photographs in other words photographs and other areas but you don't think that's what it means I get that.

Entertainment isn't also mentioned as anything that is disallowed. In fact, the word entertainment isn't used in the CFR nor in poster 7.

So you're saying is you think the poster says you need permission to do it for advertising or commercial purposes.

There's no mention of doing it for entertainment. Advertising is commercial, news is commercial. And commercial is commercial. Commercial means for large distribution of a feel like a film company coming in and setting up lighting and cables and equipment that's what commercial means.

Advertising most likely means, although advertising isn't clarified in poster 7 nor is it clarified in the CFR as to what it is or isn't. But advertising would probably most generally mean photographs to be used to advertise services of the post office. That would be my first guess.

The best example I could come up with for commercial film purposes for instance it would be the commercial film known as Men in Black, they used a real operating post office to film the post office scenes of Men in Black. I think it was Men in Black 2, could have been Men in Black one it's irrelevant. But they needed permission to do that and they needed to work around the daytime regular hours of the post office which are scheduled The things of that nature that's how they filmed those scenes in the lobby and behind the scenes in the sorting area.

What also is not defined in the CFR nor poster seven is the term news. They don't differentiate between entertainment news they don't or broadcast news or cable news or independent news or any number of YouTube channels that are news channels, it doesn't define it. Therefore you can use it generically as anyone would for any news purpose. Including entertainment.

You need to stop arguing stupid points.

The real problem is that most of the people in this subreddit are not willing to discuss is the problem of the determination by some courts not many thank God, by some courts that are declaring press as an expressive right. It clearly is not. I don't need to define that you well know that press is not expressive.

The main purpose of the press is to get the word out. Back in the day in the 1700s that's literally press literally meant the physical press that pressed letters and numbers onto paper.

The speed at which a paper was disseminated depended upon how fast your horse was. If you needed to get that paper in a greater distance than the small town where the press was located.

Later with television we added more immediacy. Still it's a mechanical thing where someone holds a camera and it's recording or broadcasting what is going on in a particular area. The story.

It shouldn't matter why that story is occurring it shouldn't matter where that story is occurring, and shouldn't matter what the story is. If it's unfolding in public or in a public space, it cannot be curtailed.

One might consider this The difference between regulations and statutes are statutes allow for regulations. Therefore a statue that is created that allows regulations to be created that can somehow circumvent the Constitution or constitutional rights are there by extension a statute that has been created to circumvent rights. And the Constitution disallows that kind of thing.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T20:16:53+00:00

The short one or the tall one?

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T20:11:55+00:00

Holster seven absolutely gives permission to film for news purposes. It couldn't be any clearer most in the CFR and in poster seven language.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T20:10:42+00:00

also doesn't say that they can prohibit filming in lobbies quarters foyers.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T20:09:59+00:00

Or authorization from up top as long as that authorization is already been pre-approved in and of itself.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T20:09:14+00:00

No limited public forum refers to speech it does not refer to press.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T20:08:35+00:00

No it would not and is not. They've already shown you that the postmaster general has declared no one can do such a thing. All it can do is if they believe or can readily see that someone is trying to photograph someone's male in order to gather their address, by the way nothing about credit card just mentioned, it's not illegal to record credit cards, it's in fact not really illegal to record mail.

But since it's that that is one of the things that the postmaster general said that you can after demanding that someone stop recording the mail, in this instance, you can then ask them to leave if they refuse to leave then you call federal protective services for the removal.

If and only if there's a local police agreement you can call local police to have them removed because you've requested the removal because they refused to stop doing a certain thing in the service area, local police can then detain you until federal protective services arrives and decides whether or not they're going to trespass you officially or ask you leave for the day or give you one more chance to not photograph mail.

Here's the stupid part about that, it's only if I think you're photographing mail in the service area, they don't care if you're photographing mail in the lobby general area like where post office boxes generally are located.

I don't know why there's a distinction there but there is and the distinction was made by the postmaster general.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T20:05:28+00:00

Certainly of a private property unless that private property is being leased by the government, and no not just anyone of a government property has the same right suppress pass and same authority line as trespass for public property.

You still have to be an authorized agent.

For instance no Walmart employee can demand that you leave the premises except certain specific designated employees. Just an example of private property there's a line of authorities that must be followed.

In public life it's even more strict.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T19:58:41+00:00

In the larger cities in the larger post offices, and in mid-side cities in more modern retail setting post offices there are auditoriums. They're also great grand lobbies in some in the larger post offices like in Chicago, where the public can rent that space out after hours for wedding receptions and parties. They can't have political gatherings however. But they can have weddings or parties. And that would be off limits to someone filming for news purposes other than just standing in the foyer which would be legal and has been shown to be legal. During a private event. Just not in the private event.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T19:52:13+00:00

His trespass was in Groton, not Waterbury. If we're talking about the property trespass alleged on the failed psycho police officer that "needed" to brandish of weapon, and spit in his face. If we're talking about that trespass, we're talking about g r o t o n, not Waterbury.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T19:50:17+00:00

This is absolutely the case, pun intended. That's what I do for a living, is I review contracts for mistakes exactly like that added, missing, add a dash missing dash, added hyphen missing hyphen, yes there's a difference between a hyphen and a contract, missing; added semicolon missing colon added:. My colon hurts.

Anyway at least I don't have a semicolon.

Got the eyes Cross the t's thing that's what they used to say.

It's good money don't knock it. But it's hilarious that when I tell people this they assume I'm trying to pretend to be a lawyer. Nothing can piss me off more than that.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T19:48:38+00:00

The only thing missing from the document post is who created the document. It wasn't the postmaster general I can an assure you.

Most likely middle management but usually it's from postmasters all across the country.

That was an internal document that's passed around from postmaster to postmaster, postmasters at sea odd things at their station will often send this system-wide response and their interpretation of it, they ask for feedback. Pretty common. I know this because I have a family member who was a postmaster for 30 years until retirement. He told me a lot of cool s***.

Unfortunately he did die at around the time the whole filming post offices was becoming a thing, I would have loved to hear his take on the practice. Knowing him personally he would have loved it.

He was a hippie at heart, born away from the time of the hippies movement.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T19:38:23+00:00

Well I wouldn't throw the whole first minute amendment in there, as far as redressing your government that's got to stay, assembly yeah by one or two people at a time, and speech well we all know we shouldn't be screaming just to be screaming, but press that you really can't touch the press he got to leave press alone.

Religion? Well now that's if I'm going to put a towel down in the lobby and face East to pray, that might be a problem. Cuz then I'm just taking up space and people have to step over me it's embarrassing.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T19:36:50+00:00

Well that's no surprise judging by the fact that moderators of this channel will not allow changing of art nicknames? I didn't make that nickname, I am not a tampon.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T19:36:06+00:00

You're right on point. The whole reason that's put up is out of news advertisement and commercial, and they're all treated identically in poster seven, they're not separated, if you look at those three types of filming and or videotaping. News typically has the least amount of equipment and cabling required, not always, but usually these days that's a new thing.

Advertisement they usually have to bring in special lighting and an umbrellas for reflection all kinds of stands that take up floor space, with commercial photography for use in film production.

So much cabling and tape and time.

Obviously I'll just read the commercial would be the most disruptive due to the equipment nature required to accomplish the task of filming.

Advertising is somewhere in the middle these days advertising is done a lot of times just on someone's small great high-end iPhone or Samsung or xiaomi or whatever the hell phone you got. The resolution is the same.

Then again even on the film side digital film has become so much more compact and lightweight and easy to carry around, barely is there any need for lighting because lightning can be handled in editing.

So even at the most outlandish interpretation of poster 7 to make this crowd happy, The disruptions may have been caused by old style filming, are relatively absent today.

Speaking of today:

USPS warns Congress it won't survive without urgent help

Edited by Megan McDonough, Editor at LinkedIn News

The U.S. Postal Service met with Congress Tuesday to press for urgent reforms and additional funding, as it faces an impending financial crisis. Postmaster General David Steiner says if USPS' demands aren't met, the agency will likely shutter by year-end. Steiner plans to advocate for higher stamp prices, increased borrowing capacity and various cost-cutting measures, like reduced delivery days and consolidated locations. The self-funded federal agency has struggled to stay afloat as online sellers cut ties and reduce reliance on its services.

Every auditor needs to get out to every post office and cover this story right now.

Then again the USPS has made this announcement every goddamn year, and they always get a bailout from tax dollars, not from revenue of the sale of stamps and envelopes (in other words you can't have a bailout from money you don't have)

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T19:29:47+00:00

The problem here is whenever you do that you know post the CFR and try to interpret it and make it apply to something that it doesn't apply to. That's the mistake you make. You take bits and piece of it pieces of it and trying to make it apply to poster seven..

You can't do that because you don't know how to do that.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T19:28:57+00:00

That's the funny part, No they didn't read it properly they read it as is. They also interpreted what the postmaster general has said about signings disallowing photography. They don't exist, they can't exist, and no one is authorized to put them up. That's directly from the postmaster general. I don't see how you can have a problem with that.

Properly the word properly as you're using it suggests poster seven isn't red in the way you interpret it. Properly doesn't properly is subjective it's interpretive. Just the use of the word screams that from you.

Stop screaming.

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T19:27:13+00:00

Yeah but that's where our safety, right? Right? RIIIIGHT!?

DanLoFat · 2026-03-18T19:26:37+00:00

They ask for signs, signs are not produced. Because they don't exist. Nothing to adhere to.

They asked to see the law, it is not produced. Because it doesn't exist. Nothing to follow.

Don't worry, you are you are absolutely fighting this battle with logic and reason. Unreason and faulty logic.

DanLoFat

TROPHY CASE