1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Welcome to the Amateur Photographer magazine online community.

    Why not create an account and take advantage of this free resource.

Smart Doorbell & Security Cameras

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by dangie, Oct 14, 2021.

  1. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    Indeed but the point was to avoid over complicating the post, copyright law and data protection being what they are, and point out that the situation isn’t as simple as some would like.
  2. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    On that, we can agree.
  3. IvorETower

    IvorETower Little Buttercup

    Yes but the data protection act etc was, as I understand it (and from the training I have received where I was working at the time) related to "Personal data" and with no information to indicate who the person is whose image you have, there's no "personal data" covered by the Act.... it's just a "random" video of someone.... a moving image and no more
    Andrew Flannigan likes this.
  4. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    ...you would think that, wouldn't you?

    I suspect that a nutter and a greedy lawyer would get together to argue otherwise :(
  5. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    But that is not the point. If you make multiple records of someone conducting an activity (or activities) that is personal data and you need to safeguard it appropriately.

    I suspect that the photographic freedom to take pictures of someone in a public place also gets a bit frayed if they were deliberately followed over a period of time and photographed undertaking different activities. That would be acquiring data about that person.
    Zou likes this.
  6. Bazarchie

    Bazarchie Well-Known Member

    That is not how I read the ICO guidance:

  7. IvorETower

    IvorETower Little Buttercup

    That's kind-of interesting as it mentions privacy, which I can understand. But I am sure that many of us have systems that look beyond our boundaries so as to catch images of people "snooping" on our houses, to see if they may be regularly empty at certain times of day etc. Such evidence could prove useful if such a snooper then broke in to burgle as if caught and taken to court, you would be able to show that their actions were probably pre-meditated as they had been observed outside your house several times in the recent past. It seems that the law is more on the side of the criminal, making it hard for innocent victims to gather evidence

    BTW should I add that I don't have CCTV equipment of any kind recording images of people near my property?
  8. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    Not in the least, largely because all you have to do is register and keep records plus have a policy that allows people to complain and receive redress. Read the guidance.
    Zou likes this.
  9. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    If not this case, then another will be brought and appealed. What happens in a County Court is far from the end of the journey.
  10. Derek W

    Derek W Well-Known Member

    This may help explain things.

    WillieJ likes this.
  11. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    I might lay a wager that we could find another barrister with a totally different opinion, depending on the size of the fee offered... ;)
  12. Derek W

    Derek W Well-Known Member

    Did you actually watch the video? From start to finish?

    Now this is just my opinion but from what you have written I would say you didn't
  13. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    Yes, I did and no I did.
  14. Derek W

    Derek W Well-Known Member

    Yup, knew I had your card marked correctly.

Share This Page