> I thought that filming crime and police was solidly legal.

Filming anything from a public space (street, sidewalk, etc) is legal, even if it's of a private space that is visible from public space. For example, if I'm on a public sidewalk next to your private residence, and you have the blinds open walking around naked - you have no reasonable expectation of privacy and can be filmed even though you're on your private property. Just like if you're driving on the public street and I have a ring doorbell camera, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy driving down the street, or walking on the sidewalk, and I can record you.

Is this generally how it works in most countries?

> Is this generally how it works in most countries?

There's a lot of variation: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_...

Common law countries? Yes.

They just haven't been sued yet by the family of a user who has been killed while filming a violent crime.

When they do their insurance costs will become astronomical. This pay structure encourages users to put themselves in harm's way.

Yes, the thing that is most likely to bite them is not legality, it's liability as a result of them paying people to do things.

How does this work for freelance journalists? Their risk is astronomical too.

Any competent freelance journalist will tell you they pay for liability insurance and the annual premium is at least $1000/year.

Said journalists are generally educated and have some training, especially around ethics. At least they're supposed to. This keeps them from shoving a camera in everyone's face while a crime is unfolding.

Citizen is taking contributions from whoever the fuck...

I mean, sharing your car is legal but that's not really what Uber ever was.

Uber was trying to scale a personal exemption from the law. What law is it that makes doing this at scale vs doing it individually a grey area?