Ring Camera Court Case: Must You Remove Yours? | BlackBeltBarrister

Подписаться 482 тыс.

Просмотров 268 тыс.

50% 1

This video is a discussion on the recent judgement in the case of Fairhurst v Woodard - #Ring cameras and doorbells. The case involved claims for harassment, breach of data protection, and nuisance.
I discussed the outcome of the judgement and what implications it might have for you and whether or not you will have to remove your Ring / Nest doorbell. Please always seek formal advice.
Ring doorbell: (amazon affiliate link)
amzn.to/3FWkqTK
Also me: @blackbeltsecrets
References:
ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/...
www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/u...
DON’T CLICK THIS: bit.ly/3HVvPUM
Also me: / blackbeltsecrets
Insta: @blackbeltbarrister
Disclaimer: Neither this nor any other video, may be taken as legal advice. I accept no liability whatever for any reliance placed upon it, as there is no contract between us and I am not instructed by you.
💌 Become a channel member to access stripes and perks!
/ @blackbeltbarrister
MY CAMERA GEAR
🎥 Big Camera amzn.to/3tW8nPU
🎥 Small Camera amzn.to/2RB7ez9
🎙 RODE VIDEOMic Pro+ amzn.to/2QCJURi
Gobe ND Filter amzn.to/2R3eEuA
Neewer Ring Light amzn.to/3aOkLtT
Switch Pod amzn.to/3sZb8yA
JOBY Tripod amzn.to/3dXJYDT
External Media Drive amzn.to/3uxNDOQ And if you like my house and decor:
Lamp 1 - amzn.to/3ntbEnm
Lamp 2 - amzn.to/3dXfUZi
🎓 Brilliant contract law book:
amzn.to/2PHC2O1 🎓 Excellent book with an overview of criminal law:
amzn.to/3gTPEAV 🎓 Learn more about trespass and tort law:
amzn.to/32N6TLS
(Affiliate link)
LAW FAQS
• Common Law
CONSUMER LAW PLAYLIST:
• Consumer Law
TREE LAW PLAYLIST:
• Tree Law Miniseries
ROAD TRAFFIC LAW PLAYLIST:
• Road Traffic Law
FAMILY LAW PLAYLIST:
• Family Law
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:
I'm a Barrister of England and Wales.
Videos for educational guidance only, Always seek advice before taking action. Videos on my channel are not legal advice and should not be taken as such. I accept no liability for any reliance placed upon the content of these videos or references, therein.
#blackbeltbarrister #law #barrister
Description contains affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Description may contain affiliate or sponsored links, for which we may receive commissions or payment.

Опубликовано:

17 окт 2021

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 1 тыс.

@BlackBeltBarrister 2 года назад

Try this next: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-i_bqIbVT6a0.html Exclusive courses: blackbeltbarrister.com/

@AA-be9rn 2 года назад

I can't afford a ring camera subscription ( not that id want one) let alone a RU-vid channel one. I always hope one day there will be free clear transparent full advise for Harrasment and Stalking as im sure it could save a life. If these actions were nipped in the bud by the person being stalked earlier on, by them knowing their rights, their protection would come quicker.. There is no free access to help in law for anyone in harassment or stalking unless you are the accused.

@ellerosse5471 2 года назад

May I ask if there are laws regarding internal private cctv cameras as I have found none.

@romeoneverdies 2 года назад

not a lawyer nor in the UK either but i find it weird that the non-expectation of privacy in public didn't come up. however its true that if the camera was pointing into the neighbour's yard or something that would be a breach of privacy, there is also the use of someone's likeness that comes into account. for sure if videos of a person was published or shared without consent that would probably be a breach of privacy as well however.

@ellerosse5471 2 года назад

Yes and no rules on dash cams outside schools.....

@paulamos8970 2 года назад

@RR Extra No Daniel (BlackBeltBarrister) is not a Freemason, this question has been asked numerous time and the answer is No, although he does know some.

@dombeck221 11 месяцев назад

This is the second home in which ru-vid.comUgkx0jZ_lGlDVJhDnmagEU8gn47cmfPNlLQU we've replaced our "regular" doorbell with a Ring video doorbell and we really enjoy it. It is very easy to install and it works very well, with a clear picture through the app and good in-home use (we added the chime, which is also easy to install and doesn't require another thought to use).

@sparkycalledmarky 2 года назад

The reporting on this case has been wildly misleading. It's all been reported as being about a ring doorbell, but the ring doorbell has virtually nothing to do with it (in this case), with it being about a much more intrusive recording system, and the attitude of the householder who had it all installed.

@BlackBeltBarrister 2 года назад

Exactly my point! 👍

@Ben-xe8ps 2 года назад

I agree and was going to say this. The media only report, out of context, about the ring doorbell and nothing else.

@paul28177 2 года назад

i was about to comment this... ll of them going on about the ring door bell yet it was actually because the dude had cameras pointing into his neighbours garden for no valid reason. essentially if you have cameras make sure they are of your property

@chuckschillingvideos 2 года назад

Any video recording system on your own property CANNOT BE INTRUSIVE.

@raystewart3648 2 года назад

@John F Yes, but that comes under the Public Safety Act (not sure of the year, but no doubt its been updated a lot of times). Its not recording sound and only criminal activity should be stored after being recorded for the purpose of Prosecuting. Every day to day goings on will not be stored or filed, in less again, the recording shows criminal activity. However I do understand what you mean.

@PurityVendetta 2 года назад

Yet again, there's so much more to this case than initially meets the eye.

@craigrobinson4603 2 года назад

Clearly a simple case of neighbours not getting on with each other and airing their dirty laundry in the courts.

@NoobYEwok Год назад

Dont agree, Harassment using surveillance is intimidation and tantamount to stalking I am in it it is very real

@johnf3326 2 года назад

And yet we are watched by cctv cameras outside of our homes everywhere

@wiseowl6354 2 года назад

John F. And they have been very busy recently...You don’t need to move far, before one has captured you!!

@atrinder8944 2 года назад

These cameras were capturing her while on her own property.

@thewhinjaninja3610 2 года назад

@@atrinder8944 What do you think street cameras do? I could take you to many cameras that could be classed as invading peoples homes

@atrinder8944 2 года назад

@@thewhinjaninja3610 then the owner of that home has the right to not be filmed on their own property.

@thewhinjaninja3610 2 года назад

@@atrinder8944 But no-one has the right to privacy from public. I get what you are saying and I agree, but anything that can be seen from a public space is legal. Maybe the Barrister can clear this one up.

@BlackOut321123 2 года назад

A lot of people in this comment section haven't actually watched the video. It's an extremely reasonable judgement that means you're perfectly within your right to own a few CCTV cameras, but, amazingly, you might get into trouble if you're harassing your neighbours, surveilling them without their permission, or shining a floodlight though their front window at all hours of the night. And no, I'm pretty confident you're not allowed to do that in Texas either.

@darrenedwards5051 2 года назад

This a uk law not the us

@ghostwriter720 2 года назад

in the united states there is case law that says you have no expectation of privacy in public. so if your not on their property and it can be seen from public or your property you can record it. audio would be a different matter, especially if your cctv camera is capable and you do record audio and you do not have a sign indicating both audio and video are being done. in order for it to be legal it must be obvious, such as a person on the street with a cell phone recording.. people know the cell phone audio records so its obvious if they are holding it in a manner consistant with using it as a recording device that it will capture audio. you might have heard of 1 party consent states and 2 party consent states. 1 party consent states refer to recording conversations -that they are a part of- without needing consent of the other party. people can run afoul of this if they are secretly recording like this and the person gets a phone call and has a conversation on the phone -that the person doing the recording is not a part of- and the person on the phone is not aware of a recording being made, the person recording could face criminal charges of what some states call wire tapping, or something like it depending on the circumstances -does not apply to a conversation the person recording is a part of-. if they are not secretly recording then those charges would not apply (if you told them you are recording because it is not obvious, or you are obviously recording). 2 party consent states it mostly applies to phone calls but also applies when not on phone and its not obvious your recording and not in public (how it applies in public can get tricky). as for a light, you can get drapes and use them to create privacy

@lauralishes1 2 года назад

It was a stupid judgment. I've got all these cameras including a light that goes on every time they detect motion and I live in a flat, I'd like to see my neighbours make me remove them. My car had its windscreen smashed which is why I got them. If I remove my cameras that I have pointing on the car park which alerts me if anyone goes near my car, are they going to pay for my car if it gets damaged? They also record audio

@boiledelephant 2 года назад

So he installed cameras that overlooked his neighbor and floodlights that lit up his neighbour's house, without speaking to his neighbour, then lied that the cameras were nonoperational, then threatened to send footage of his neighbour to other neighbours and police (when no crime had been committed). In other words, acted like a complete creep and arsehole. And now there is firm precedent that you can have cameras, but don't be a creep/arsehole about it. This sounds like a win.

@DunamisStorm 2 года назад

Don’t apologise for the length of the video, it was a good thorough overview. Thanks for all you legal insights, they are appreciated by this mature law student 😉

@BlackBeltBarrister 2 года назад

Thank you for saying so 😉

@marklittler784 2 года назад

Items contained within, one Ring camera, one UK 50 page judgement and instruction manual. 😃😂😃😂😃😂😃😂😃😂😃😂

@Stuart_George 2 года назад

In 300 different languages, don't forget.!😀

@ZooScott 2 года назад

I expect that just fine 🆘 👀 🥁 .

@Arcticnick 2 года назад

@@Stuart_George Hahaha!

@AA-be9rn 2 года назад

Classic 😂

@Ash-do2pv 2 года назад

You are right, it does ring a bell !!

@FM60260 2 года назад

If a neighbour had a motion activated camera that was pointing at my property, I would be tempted to dress up as a grey alien or ghost or something and have a bit of fun for a few minutes in the middle of the night (on my own land of course). It would be interesting to see how they would react.

@colboysigmax Год назад

Believe it or not they can have you charged with stalking...

@josephinecameron6963 11 месяцев назад

Far too funny 😂🤣😂🤣

@verminwatch_out1283 2 года назад

Clearly there's probably more to this un-neighbourly relationship between these two adversaries than revealed in this case...

@HeresMo 2 года назад

Agreed

@janettetimms8650 2 года назад

Possible irrelevant for disclosure issue of one degree can't be proved to be relative to another ergo stricken out? Genuine question

@harveyquinn5494 2 года назад

Imagine the complaining neighbour is burgled surely they would want cctv looked at!👍

@1harryrobert 2 года назад

Let's hope they are

@cherylj7460 2 года назад

Not really, according to the judgement.

@mdmcnamee 2 года назад

Thank you for a very comprehensive summation and review! Interested to hear your general thoughts on a camera positioned such that it covers own property and public Highway only (not neighbours), since previous videos you have posted suggest there is no automatic or assumed right to privacy in a public space. I feel this is fundamentally different to a shared communal space, but as always it’s not that simple!

@ieuan4real 2 года назад

I was thinking precisely this! Would be interested to know the answer. Especially given the police request and use CCTV that captures movements on the public highway and this doesn't appear to be a Data Protection issue

@PhilipBallGarry 2 года назад

Hi BB, great video again. Very informative. My cameras (4) aren't particularly good - actually chosen because they are only useful within the boundary of my property. The two on the rear of the house can only "see" my garden, shed and extent of the high fences. The front two are useful up to a range of about five metres. I was visited by the police a few months ago as the neighbour across the road had a break in and they wanted to see if it had been captured. Unfortunately for my neighbour the footage was useless due to the low res image and reach beyond my front drive. Fortunately for me though, it proved that the privacy of others wasn't compromised. My next door neighbour did object when I put them up a few years ago as she didn't want me to record her "comings and goings" as the track of her vehicle is across the front of my property but I declined her objections. It is a sticky subject though and I foresee many issues in the future, Ironic in our evermore "recorded" society.

@TRPWiz 2 года назад

We had a problem set of people down the street, who for no reason, started targeting us and even trying to damage my car. The little girl, on orders from her mother, sprayed something into my mother face. The police were called obviously, and they suggested, and almost insisted, that I set up a camera on the front window to catch her in the act. So I did. We caught her, and now they're gone. I have a camera set up at my front window now, 24/7, and I'll never remove it. it watches over my car, so it's doing what it's intended to do.

@madhatter61 2 года назад

That complies with gdpr, it's doing what it's intended to do.

@joem7799 2 года назад

No, this case shows you cannot capture video of people outside of your garden area. All these cases will be appealed now, and even murderers who claimed they were never out of their home, were caught on CCTV and ring cameras to be out of their house, dragging a suitcase, then coming back home twenty minutes later minus the suitcase. All these videos were used in evidence against the criminals. Now they will appeal and those incriminating videos used to convict will be rejected and the criminal will walk free. People should not be out naked in their garden anyway, or doing intimate things with a lover. I really don’t know how it was found that the doctor had her privacy violated. We all get our privacy violated when we go out of our homes, people look at us, and can note that what we are wearing. People who want privacy should stay in their home and do online shopping.

@TRPWiz 2 года назад

@@joem7799 People should not be naked in their garden anyway? I'm hoping that was a joke.

@joem7799 2 года назад

@@TRPWiz the point is walking about fully dressed while out in the street should not be a reason to claim people saw you, and by seeing you it’s violated your privacy, and a court agrees, your privacy was violated. Camera or not, we are not entitled to privacy when walking past our neighbours garden. I see my neighbours coming out of their homes and walking up their garden path. I can note their coming and going, but now l must demand that my house and my neighbours houses across the street, are wrongly sited and allowing us to look out of our windows and violate each other’s privacy. We need to sue our house builders. I have witnessed two neighbours getting new fitted kitchens installed. Well l know that the work peops were there entering the houses with boxes and they had “ fitted kitchens” on their vans. If it’s allowed without a camera, then it should be allowed with a camera! The court has ruled that it’s not allowed with a camera so it cannot be allowed with the human eyes too! I am not on side with the guy who fell foul of the courts, it seems he has been using his camera, his ring doorbell, etc as some tool to alarm his neighbour. Maybe, she thought he was monitoring her comings and goings to use for the purpose of breaking into her home. He has caused trouble and inconvenience for all ring door bell owners, and now all CCTV will need to be removed by police who set it up to monitor streets and roads etc, because the judge has ruled it invades privacy.

@joem7799 2 года назад

@@verreal it was only the edge of her garden and her gate, but as soon as she left the gate area she would be seen in public, there’s not a lot of difference really, it’s just a technicality but l do think the fact it’s been set in law that to capture on film a gate of a private property, will have major ramifications. I often watch about crime documentaries. Saw one the other night, where the husband told the police he hadn’t left his house, but the lie was exposed when the police asked for all ring camera videos in the neighbourhood and on one saw the husband’s car passing on the road outside the neighbours property. Obviously, people are now being told they can’t film beyond their property. Anyway, the police also noticed the car returning and noted that the overall trip was twenty minutes, so concluded that he had disposed of his wife’s body ten minutes from his house, so they went in the direction of his car, for ten minutes in their cars, and investigated the area, and found the body. So, that’s what l mean, that kind of evidence will no longer be available because of this grouchy teacher’s case. But l do not blame her entirely, l know that the idiocy of the ring camera owner was also a major factor in getting this ruling, because he was rude, and provocative when she had a word with him on the matter, as if he thought he could aim cameras on her to annoy her and the law would support him. It didn’t and now he’s crying that he can’t afford the fine, and will have to sell his home and never afford another one. The arrogant man said he can’t even afford £5000. Why do little people go rushing towards lawyers and courts, acting mega rich, what idiocy! Everyone should know to try and resolve disputes in a civil way.

@fivish 2 года назад

Thames Valley police often call for door bell footage in the vicinity of a crime. My doorbell only records for 30 seconds and only when activated by a humans approach to my door. The activation zone is restricted to within my property. However, when activated it records the entire view of the video camera. I dont know how it could possibly record anything going on on the pavement, in the road, or by my neighbours front garden unless activated by a human approach to my door.

@Wonkabar007 2 года назад

Thats a good point, activation zones are useful but if the whole camera view is recorded, and it covers other peoples private property, its a issue. It would be better if only the activation zones were recorded.

@Pureblood002 2 года назад

Never thought I'd watch a video about the legal ramifications of doorbell ownership, or that one would ever exist to be watched.

@EasyChineseCooking 2 года назад

What do you think after watching it

@Pureblood002 2 года назад

The doorbell was innocent , the owner not so much .

@frankyflowers 2 года назад

its in the uk

@marklittler784 2 года назад

"Doorbell ownership ! " 😃😂😃😂😃😂😃😂😃😂😃😂😃

@marklittler784 2 года назад

She should become a burka.

@liveloud9894 2 года назад

I have several cameras covering all the elevations of my house including a ring doorbell at the front, my neighbours are aware that they all record and that their gardens are covered in the field of view as well as part of the public highway at the front of both properties The cameras came in handy last weekend when a drunk , uninsured driver ploughed into their car outside on the road in the middle of the night

@marklittler784 2 года назад

They were lucky my cousin and her husbands car were parked in their own drive and the car the Police were chasing turned in and smashed into both.

@AA-be9rn 2 года назад

The way things are going that drunk driver will be able to sue them for filming him in public from a private area.

@liveloud9894 2 года назад

@@AA-be9rn Yes I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the police called and said thanks for the cctv footage but we’ve had to let the driver off for hurt feelings and we’re prosecuting you for harassment

@AA-be9rn 2 года назад

@@liveloud9894 Absolutely this is the future were taking images will out way crime in an offence but the police ask for evidence, I've never agreed with removal of human rights but i do now for a massive overhaul.

@Neils400 2 года назад

My neighbour has a ring doorbell on their front door and a ring camera overlooking our shared driveway and garages. I'm fine with the video recording but to learn today that they record audio as well if absolutely frightening. I'm well pissed off and feel like taking it down for him.

@suzann2531 2 года назад

Not removing mine it gives me peace of mind during these dark evening’s. Let’s me know who is prowling around in my garden and who is at the door before I open it.

@jaycearoo 2 года назад

That's it isn't it, 4am this morning I caught two going through mine to get to the neighbours then across the gated community to the otherside, ruddy joke...

@Rhyd 2 года назад

As long as you are reasonable with how you are processing what is being recorded I'm sure there will be no issues.

@Arcticnick 2 года назад

Mine is targeted!

@jaycearoo 2 года назад

@@Arcticnick I bet there will be more now this reduction in benefits has come into effect, certain parts of the country I love visiting have it harder than other's.... It must be really hard for some families to get by and I can understand why some have resulted to stealing... I remember a time when people's could walk out of a job into another, non of this CV scenario that separates... A good days work for good pay and on there doorstep too.... not having to travel ninety minutes to work at a cost of a days wages as in some cases... I feel for these people's... Thirty years ago nothing was broke except the police and court systems...

@robwakefield8215 2 года назад

... without milk or sugar..... or tea.

@mcdon2401 2 года назад

Excellent timing... just spent the weekend fitting multiple Ring cameras at my parent's house. While you can't restrict the field of view easily, it's the work of seconds to set the camera zone of interest up to only cover your own property.

@pabloblue999 2 года назад

Your timing is impeccable!

@Arcticnick 2 года назад

Maybe it was also your great timing, too.

@BariumCobaltNitrog3n 2 года назад

This is reassuring information as my neighbors and I have cameras due to mail theft. A man in a rental van was following the Fedex and UPS trucks to get into the apartment lobby, taking whatever he wanted, unquestioned. We posted pictures of him around the building and never saw him again. No sound and very specific views.

@vijay-c 2 года назад

What a perfectly reasonable judgement - had been thinking of buying one of these types of devices, but I'm very close to a couple of neighbors - will certainly double check with them before fitting anything external.

@JasonEDragon 2 года назад

Viewing this from USA, this judgement seems to be overly restrictive to me. A person should be perfectly able to record video of all areas of their property even if 12 cameras were used. As to neighbors, it seems to me that cameras should be placed to minimize viewing of neighboring private properties, but within the limits of what is reasonably practical. For example, I shouldn't be prevented from recording the outside of my shed because there is no way to mount a camera that does not record a slight portion of a neighbors property. And audio recordings can be as helpful as video recordings - and there should a reasonable middle ground that perhaps allows recording audio from near the center of a property but avoids it near a property line. Tesla cars can record video from several external cameras - and other cars will likely follow suit going forward. Should this security feature be disabled because the video recordings may capture images from outside the owner's property?

@gravemind6536 2 года назад

@@JasonEDragon You forget to mention the obxnoxious floodlights that were overly bright and poorly aimed.

@enobehtot7600 2 года назад

I feel like I'm watching an episode of Max Headroom with your video edits after EVERY sentence 😜

@Stringbean421 2 года назад

I hate those edits. Many RU-vidrs are doing this now. It's not natural.

@bazzacuda_ 2 года назад

Thank you for the video, that is useful to know about. I have a Ring doorbell that overlooks both my and my neighbour's door. Important to note that she knows about it and also that I don't have a Ring subscription so nothing is getting recorded. I get notifications of movement if anybody comes between the two houses (including my neighbour or her visitors) so I could view everything they do outside their own door but the audio quality isn't good enough to pick up conversations with anyone not directly speaking to my doorbell - I couldn't eavesdrop even if I wanted to. With the movement notifications: during the day I don't often look unless I know my neighbour is away and if I do I'll stop as soon as I see it is OK, reason being that just watching it will use battery life and I'm usually too busy with work as well as just not being nosey. If the notification goes off at night when I know my neighbour is unlikely to be out and about I'd be straight to watching it. I'm as much concerned for the safety of my neighbour as for my own property. I'll certainly be talking to her and her family that visit to make them aware of the above and give them an open invitation to speak to me any time if they have concerns, we chat frequently anyway.

@soundman6645 2 года назад

Yes the issues you discuss are very real. As an installer of security systems and CCTV, I am very careful where cameras point and my advice to customers. This group of issues is very well understood in the Pro security industry. While the details and the specifics may vary from country to country and across local authorities, the general principles remain the same. Just as a matter of interest, pretty much all modern CCTV equipment will record audio in some quantity and detail, but, almost without exception, that feature is turned off as a factory default, we almost never record audio. Recording audio is a legal minefield, very few professionals want to tiptoe thru. This group of issues has become, somewhat more of a concern in recent years as the, recording time, image quality and low light performance of CCTV systems has dramatically improved.

@Brizlebird 2 года назад

Thank you ever so much for producing this.

@BlackBeltBarrister 2 года назад

🙏

@SolvelawUk 2 года назад

Having read the judgment, the defendant did himself no favours and the damage to credibility was against him. The question I posed on linkedin was: if one can film in public (inc audio) without issue then why is it different if you film a public street from a private property? Can someone in the know explain the difference? I have seen subsequently that is from a ECJ case (2014?) but unfortunately I have not seen any reasoning rather just the ECJ computer says, so it says. Before anyone says, I am not a gdpr lawyer.

@WolfmanWoody 2 года назад

The very same thing occured to me, being a photographer.

@SolvelawUk 2 года назад

@Steve Gee I looked into this and there is an ECJ decision which makes it clear that private cctv of a public area will resulted in data protection issues. This I think was a Czech case back in 2014

@TanjoGalbi 2 года назад

First, the judgement was based on the UK's Data Protection Act (DPA) 2018, not the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Second, the ICO who uphold the DPA state on their website that the DPA does not apply "If you collect information about individuals for any reason other than your own personal, family or household purposes, you need to comply." They also go on to state in a section answering "Does it apply to me?": "You will not need to comply if you only use the information for your own personal, family or household purposes - eg personal social media activity, private letters and emails, or use of your own household gadgets."

@theaylesburycyclist8756 2 года назад

I must admit, I was always under the impression that GDPR only applies to organisations and businesses, not private individuals. Back in 2014 I had my camcorder set up in my window, capturing a time-lapse. Long story short, someone complained to the police, but the police said I was well within my rights to have a camera filming from my window... 🤷‍♂️

@shardlake 2 года назад

@@theaylesburycyclist8756 The issue would only arise if you then use that footage to intimidate your neighbours, which appears to be the issue in this case, you are no longer using the data for its intended use.

@GWOAT 2 года назад

Fantastic video. Thank you so much. I had a neighbour who put up CCTV cameras and it was recording my front door and me leaving and coming home. Also recording my voice conversations with my partner when we'd sunbathe in front garden in the summer. She was a single mother who was so jealous of me moving in with her neighbour and start spreading vile and untrue roumers about me. She used to wait until me and my partner would come home in the evenings and shout vile and hateful stuff at us. Little does she know her own camera was the best evidence we have as it's coming to court. She's still stuck in her little corporation house paid for by taxpayer spying on people daily as she has nothing else to do and no man in his right mind would go near her. So it was a case of 'Hoisted by her own petard'. We've since moved to a much nicer neighborhood and have heard she's now harassing the new tennents of our old house. So delighted not to have to look at her pig ugly face again.

@Alan-xxxxxx 2 года назад

I had 4 cctv cameras covering my basement area, the stairs, the communal path to the other flats in the house and the main pavement. They were installed because I had anti social neighbours who were making my life unbearable. I had full permission from my Housing Association and the Police. They provided enough evidence for two different prosecutions - the teenage son was caught on audio swearing and threatening me and breaching his ASBO and got 240 hours community service. The Mum's boyfriend was caught vandalising one of the cameras and got fined £50 and had to pay compensation. I also caught a fight on their last day before they were evicting and on a separate occasion my motorbike and a neighbour's bike being knocked over by a Royal Mail van. I now only have a Ring doorbell which just covers my door area and a main camera which cover the motorbike parking bay.

@Alan-xxxxxx 2 года назад

@@willmagicman1289 Mine was relatively minor, but the exhaust was still £1000+. My neighbours Harley had more damage and took longer to repair. The Royal Mail van had driven into a parking space and clipped the bikes and they toppled over. Everything was caught on video, but they still didnt instantly except responsibility and settle the claim so it dragged on for many weeks resulting in expensive hire bikes and a big bill.

@cbcdesign001 2 года назад

@@Alan-xxxxxx Yeah companies sometimes do that. An Iceland van reversed onto my drive and did 1500 pounds worth of damage to my vehicle. Their insurers denied liability right up until the point where my solicitors arranged a court date and reminded them that CCTV footage clearly showed their idiot driver doing the deed then driving away. At that point they finally settled. This is why CCTV or a dashcam is necessary now, because these bastards try to avoid paying out even when their client is so obviously at fault.

@madmantronixx7998 Год назад

I asked the police and my neighbour housing officer to see if I could put up a camera pointing directly at my car and a doorbell and said yes. Exactly the same issues with ASB in my area. We had instances of lads trying front doors in the early hours. So I was concerned for my safety so they said yes go for it!

@ianl1052 2 года назад

Two of my neighbours (opposite me) have CCTV fitted. One of them happens to catch my car. No complaints from me.👍🙂👍

@ElliottRodgers 2 года назад

What about a mini Blink camera that is setup in a living room that *may* catch video/audio a communal courtyard garden through a patio door? Only collects when someone triggers camera (goes near patio doors) for 30 seconds. Already have obvious stickers on windows that CCTV is in use.

@Jeff-mu4mt 2 года назад

Had someone move in next door and set up cameras all around. They pointed one of their cams directly at my house so what i did was a back yard cleanup and had to walk by the cam every few minutes to dump trash, which means they are alerted every time i walked by. I must have passed in front at least 30 times which meant they were alerted 60 times going and coming back. Well next day noticed cams were pointed back to their own yard. That was funny.

@Baddad36 2 года назад

What about a Tesla? Or indeed any car with cameras that record when the car is parked. I'm thinking the World has moved on and, yet again, the Courts are struggling to catch up.

@collincovid6950 2 года назад

Good point and why are street cameras, we have one from the council in our road, allowed, if we are not?

@justinwebber9968 2 года назад

@@collincovid6950 I imagine the ruling will be overturned at appeal the whole thing seems stupid.

@shardlake 2 года назад

The issue was the misuse of the data, not collecting it, in this case the defendant used the data to intimidate the plaintiff, he was not using the cameras purely for the security purpose he claimed.

@oddity4650 2 года назад

@@collincovid6950 I think you are allowed to aim your own cctv on the streets or anh public location, I found out, council cctv don't use audio. Although people can ask for subject access request, of the data controller of that cctv, if it is aimed on public locations, that is obviously for crimes, missing person cases etc that would benefit from a home owners cctv footage.

@oddity4650 2 года назад

I think the same law applies, if it is in a public place then it is ok, if it is in a private place and you did not have permission to record there, then you probably have to turn it off.

@Kraang 2 года назад

This sounded absolutely insane until I realized it was in the U.K., then it made sense.

@wscottwatson 2 года назад

In what way insane?

@905SCOTT 2 года назад

You are obviously unable to grasp the situation or indeed the reason for the judgment.Very little to do with this ring camera.Your spiteful little comments are a reflection of your ignorance.Grow up..

@lindsayheyes925 2 года назад

Great video... it raises a further issue of an after-market dashcam which continues to record when the car is parked. 🤔

@Moosealini 2 года назад

Excellent video, so glad I watched it ...This case was highly simplified by most media outlets to the point of being misleading! I have ring floodlight cameras front and back with the alarm and doorbell. This case worried me and I considered my own position regarding these. The Ring system is a very affordable way to provide peace of mind when away from home, but the floodlight cameras are highly configurable with regards to what they capture. Easy to disable sound recording and set zones that don't trigger recording and to black out viewing / recording areas altogether i.e. neighbouring properties. But I wonder from a GDPR point of view whether I should complete a DPIA?

@brianbickle7395 2 года назад

“ the law is an ass”- Charles Dickens, two hundred years ago. Some things never change.

@salerio61 2 года назад

"The law is *a* ass"

@jibicusmaximus4827 2 года назад

George Chapman 1654 apparently he stole it too, he just published it in a play..

@jibicusmaximus4827 2 года назад

"fuck tha police" NWA lol.

@davet9900 2 года назад

Its got worse. That is the law at its best, now it gets the good far too often

@LRDefender80 2 года назад

@@jibicusmaximus4827 eh?

@paulrichardson4715 2 года назад

Brilliant explanation as always.

@SqueekyBums 2 года назад

*If you live in a newish home with external electric / gas meter boxes,* any criminal can simply open the electric box and switch off your homes power. This disables the internet router and any of these new 'security' systems that depend on WiFi are rendered useless! The suppliers do not offer this, but you would need a UPS connected to the system AND the router.

@otterkarman8740 2 года назад

Most important is that each case is dealt with on it's own merits, situation can vary immensely. This case is a reference point of historical guidance, it's seems that the COURTS views of audio recording and storage is the main breach of DPA . Just wonder if an appeal is pending!!!

@thebemusedone1901 2 года назад

Wasn't it rather how the data was used i.e. to harass his neighbour which was deemed a breach. The court seem to be okay with using a video doorbell just to see who was walking up your path or ringing the bell.

@spartantkd1970 2 года назад

What about the position where someone moves in and the cameras are already installed ie fixed on the wall etc.?

@landoremick7422 2 года назад

Really useful video. Thanks for the explanation

@MartinParnham 2 года назад

Thanks for this very informative video. We have just bought one of those home security systems (not specifically a Ring doorbell) for a house we are due to be moving into so that is good to know before we install it.

@Pythonaria 2 года назад

We had a problem family in our street back in 2000. They made peoples' lives a misery, particularly the elderly. My neighbour, who at the time was in her 70s, was one of their victims. Police and council refused to do anything except issue ASBOs which the youths of this family used as a badge of honour. Other people in the street were fed up with this family so we got together and formed a residents' association, made up of both council and private householders. Three of us put up CCTV. I had mine trained on both my neighbour's garden and my own, plus the parking bays across the street. My camera did have audio on it which recorded the foul language and threats from these youths when they decided to harrass my neighbour by sitting on her wall, throwing rubbish into her garden and threatening her with violence. All the footage was shown to the relevant authorities (the police and Council), also our MP at the time. The recordings were on video - it was before USB sticks and digital CCTV cameras so couldn't be uploaded to the internet like they can now. Eventually, the police and Council took action and the problem family were evicted. We have had no problems in our street since. Sadly, my neighbour passed away age 91 a few years ago. She was a good friend. My CCTV camera broke down years ago and I haven't replaced it. Sounds like this man was totally OTT.

@jibicusmaximus4827 2 года назад

wow, well done.

@andrew_koala2974 2 года назад

Pythonaria What is written on the vehicle? Is it POLICE or police? They sound the same, but be clear. They are not the same thing. POLICE are a Service CORPORATION -Much like McDonalds All CORPORATE names are written in the ALL CAPS iteration When you actually 'see' what it is you are looking at and pay attention you will become aware of this fact. You need to be awake for that. Remember, Zombies have eyes but cannot see - Ears and cannot hear. When you study Law for a couple of decades you will learn that. The reason you are not taught Law in that CORPORATE GOVERNMENT indoctrination institution you refer to as school is because these things are not for the vulgar to know. Neither does it serve the EL-ite that you know it It is not secret, but it is 'secretive' and the majority of people just do not pay attention to detail. A human failing often leads to premature or catastrophic death. An incident will occur that will catch you off guard and kill you. I learned that as a pilot during my long - 30 year - Military Career

@Pythonaria 2 года назад

@@andrew_koala2974 I see what you're saying. In this case, the police were not to blame as they did take action against this family. It was the Courts who let them off time and time again. Social Services were involved with this family and had been for years. The "do-gooders" claimed that people in our street were making malicious accusations towards this family, in other words, they tried to turn the perpetrators into the victims. Once we had video evidence which was compiled over several months, it proved what we were all saying was correct. A meeting was arranged in the local hall with all the relevant authorities - the police, Council representatives, the ASBO people, local councillors and our MP. My elderly neighbour's son attended the meeting. What they didn't know was he was a Barrister. When he stood up at the meeting and spoke, it was a joy to behold as the whole lot on the stage were visibly squirming - especially when he informed them he was prepared to act for the whole street pro bono. The hall was packed out that night, it was standing room only and it's a big hall. Bear in mind this was 20 years ago. The police then are very different to the police now. Although the politicisation had already begun, it wasn't nearly so bad as it is now.

@effervescence5664 2 года назад

This is going to cause a huge issue when it comes to trades people considering almost everyone has cameras protecting their vehicles and sheds/garages now due to the police and legal system constantly failing to care, investigate, catch or protect peoples livelihoods when it comes to criminals carrying out peel and steal etc on vans and storage units. I suppose I can always put up a PIR activated flame thrower with signage stating "trespassers will be burnt, survivors will be crispy".

@nomdeplume798 2 года назад

Since the story broke in the national press I've spoken to 3 neighbours who were almost paranoid about the subject. What little knowledge they did have came from a tabloid article. What little knowledge l had, and a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, is that anyone can take photos or videos in a public place, subject to certain "common sense" conditions. If you aim your camera at someone's children or a bedroom window that's a bit too weird in anyone's book. Likewise if you frequently take images or videos the same person without their permission. But perhaps people may fall foul of the law quite innocently and that's where advice like yours is invaluable, so thank you for explaining it so succinctly.

@patrickrose1221 2 года назад

This chanel is great ! Free , sound advice . Keep em coming son .

@BlackBeltBarrister 2 года назад

🙏 246 videos and counting

@patrickrose1221 2 года назад

@@BlackBeltBarrister you've filled such a gap in the market it's inspirational , I wish you and yours the very best , peace and love mate x

@BlackBeltBarrister 2 года назад

@Patrick Rose Thank you so much

@Kilrathal 2 года назад

So this is interesting. How would this court case affect parking mode Dashcams? My understanding of this situation is, my car is my property. Parked within a space that i own. How does it recording 24/7 apply with this particular court case? As it is on loop recording to ensure security of my vehicle. Additionally where it is parked is already covered by communal camera systems. But other spaces are also technically private property.

@shardlake 2 года назад

Collecting the footage is not the issue, what you do with it is, that seems to be the factor in this case, using footage to intimidate, not for the purpose it was intended - crime prevention.

@gamadame4476 2 года назад

@@shardlake but according to the outcome in this court case collecting footage is the issue as recording people coming and going, for example collecting patterns in which your neighbours enter and leave the street is a breach of gdpr according to this.

@DarrenStarr 2 года назад

@@gamadame4476 The govt are collecting data on us all coming and going with anpr

@derekheeps1244 2 года назад

Photography ( including videography ) in a public place is NOT illegal . My dashcam also records 24/7 in parking mode and looks down my drive and therefore onto the street in front of my house . I never normally look at the footage which is overwritten every 24 hours or so , thus I am satisfied there is no breach of GDPR ; footage would only be looked at in the event of an incident being captured

@alwaysdisputin9930 2 года назад

There's a lot of cruel weirdos out there & UK has a terrible conviction rate for rape so it could be quite worrying if men are recording people each day & possibly planning to brutally attack & torture them. Merely saying "honestly I'm only going to look at the footage if something happens" may not be reassuring. But you have a right to secure your home with cameras. So IMO (i'm not lawyer) try hard not to do anything apart from cameras that might let people totally hammer you for costs on a harassment claim

@shardlake 2 года назад

This case seems to hinge on the misuse of the data collected (intimidation) rather than its legitimate collection for security or crime prevention reasons, the judgement appears to be entirely correct in this case, will be interesting to see if it is appealed and is looked at by the higher courts.

@SolvelawUk 2 года назад

I agree it raises issues as people do share stuff like this on social media. The next door app is rife with stuff like this.

@andrew_koala2974 2 года назад

Shardlake Examined by a higher COURT NOT looked at by the higher courts Note that choice of words and correct grammar is critical in the application of Law. You have to educate yourself to a higher level by undertaking a lot of reading and increasing your vocabulary. Now tell me how many types of English are there. I know already that your answer will be incorrect COMMENT REFERENCE: Shardlake.2021102140500

@OrdinaryJoe12 2 года назад

yes, the defendants were using the cctv to deliberately monitor his neighbours

@mrburn6119 2 года назад

@@andrew_koala2974 Punctuation is one category of rules that fall under the umbrella of grammar. In fact, punctuation is critical to many common grammar rules .

@evaahh9584 2 года назад

@@andrew_koala2974 American English, English English, Australian English , Canadian English and more if you count dialects. Language is not objective; it is subjective to the ways in which society constructs it.

@suer1945 2 года назад

I have a door cam.. but it just takes an instant picture of who ever goes close to my door.. no audio and no moving video.. it's my protection I'm a single older woman with an autistic child ..I cant see why I shouldnt have that

@robwakefield8215 2 года назад

You can. Do, in fact.

@suer1945 2 года назад

Thankyou for confirming I'm ok it's just so I know who is at my door gets sent to my phone

@good7saint Год назад

I will have to tell you a funny story that is similar to the lights part of this but involves a barking dog. Years ago my mum and dad had a dog that hardly ever barked when it was in the garden. Well one particular night the dog was in the garden about ten pm and started barking resulting with the next door neighbours phoning to complain. Next morning the neighbour phoned again to apologise and explain why. They found footprints in a flower bed. The dog was barking at someone trying to break into their back window

@johnosborne9271 2 года назад

How do you go about raising a case like this? My neighbour installed a floodlight camera which seems to point at my property. I have asked them if they could move it to point directly at their gate but they refused instead of my house (it seems to be a wide angle camera with their gate being at the edge of it's view). The police said "it's a civil matter" and the ICO said "we'll write to them but we have no power to force them to move it". I contacted a local solicitor who said "it may not be cost effective to issue a solicitor letter" which I take to mean that they simply didn't want to take the case on.

@markthecruel1055 2 года назад

Find some way to make it a nuisance to be pointing at your property and they'll soon shift it. ie a flood light or laser pointer which comes on when theirs does and blows out the image on the camera.

@r6stu 2 года назад

Umm I am having issues with my neighbour and CCTV, I dosent record any of his property but when he walks past my front you can see him! However It has caught him on multiple occasions kicking my doors of my van, and punching my wing mirrors in on my van as well. I do have multiple CCTV signs in view as well though.

@exgren 2 года назад

Nice neighbours you have

@clifficus 2 года назад

Balaclava, dark night, baseball bat, problem solved.👍😃

@angusmacmillan5365 2 года назад

Excellent analysis and advice.

@Spence2602 2 года назад

This was really interesting as the typical press report was not clear but the long and short of this it was all down to two neighbours disagreeing with each other, the fact that the doorbell and cameras are just to clickbait for the media headline.

@omar-tesla 2 года назад

Hi, how about having a dash cam (Taxi/PHV) interior recording for security purposes (as some passengers nowadays make false claims & ruin driver's lives, what are the rights as a driver? Thank you.

@boiledelephant 2 года назад

This is a great question, because like a restaurant or bar, it's simultaneously your property, kiiind of a public space, and a place of business.

@peter_piper 2 года назад

May be wrong but can't you disable sound recording on Rings? And if so, would doing that stand up in court?

@cs_fl5048 2 года назад

Of course, I live in an area where people don't live on top of each other like so many villages in the UK. Most of those cameras can have their triggering field limited.

@garyjones8973 2 года назад

Photography and videoing in a public place is not a crime and there’s no implied right to privacy in a public place, that’s why we’re filmed in petrol stations shops pretty much everywhere.

@OGGalleryCrew92 2 года назад

Correct, The plod just don't like it thats all, But we are the most monited country in the world with the most CCTV in our town and city's and that is just our Goverment watching us in the Uk,

@andrew_koala2974 2 года назад

Gary Jones Photography and video recording in a public place -- is the correct sentence. Don't screw up again. It is not difficult when you think about what you are writing Jones. We are not being FILMED - because FILM has not been used for almost three decades. Substitute Filmed for 'Recorded' Filmed is a specific description that is inaccurate for the reason stated above. Using the word Recorded is a more generic term. The problem is that you and most others have been so brainwashed into using the word FILMED that you find it difficult not to use it - Brainwashing is very effective and people do not realize what has been done to them. The same applies to the word PERSON. No one is born a PERSON - A PERSON is a CORPORATE fiction created in the 15th century for the purpose of conducting commerce. It is a DEAD Genderless entity that is im-PERSON-ating the living Soul, and has stolen the name and identity of the living soul. The only difference is that the PERSON has its name in ALL CAPS like the CORPSES in the cemetery. -- The FIRST NAME and LAST NAME - SURNAME were also created at that time. The living soul does not have a FIRST NAME and LAST NAME - SURNAME The living soul Man and WoMan (incorrectly pronounce wooman) have a 'Given Name' and 'Family Name' in Mixed Case Letters. ALL CORPORATE Names are in ALL CAPS Before you get to bed, look up in the Oxford Dictionary what PERSONA means. You will discover it is a Mask ... The PERSON is masking your true and real identity. Not knowing the difference between a Living Soul and a PERSON / INDIVIDUAL is how you are screwed in COURT SOME OF THE BEST GAMES ARE PLAYED IN A COURT Good luck and goodbye

@LRDefender80 2 года назад

@@OGGalleryCrew92 what do you mean the plod don’t like it? They love private cctv! Why do you think they keep looking for it when a crime has been committed?

@DirkGently1972 2 года назад

@@OGGalleryCrew92 You clearly have never been to China 🇨🇳 then?

@eskertoo 2 года назад

Funny how we never hear of people walking free from court after using this defence."It wasn't me ,it was my legal fiction!"

@collincovid6950 2 года назад

Used to gather evidence of a crime is fine. Interesting one with Wayne Cousins though

@garryparsons1344 2 года назад

Good summary, think I'll go and check...

@sl3rtyb3rdf3rts 2 года назад

I have a BlackVue camera system in my car. This records even if the ignition is off. What about DPA in this case?

@TanjoGalbi 2 года назад

Ring doorbells do not record audio all the time, only for a few seconds when motion is detected and when someone presses the button on the doorbell. It is highly unlikely that they can record neighbours' conversations for long enough to get the whole conversation. It is akin to someone passing by and overhearing the conversation for the few seconds they pass. What if that passing person was vlogging? Have they now violated the data protection act by publishing their vlog online and so publishing the brief captured conversation?

@cbjm4568 2 года назад

Some have a advance pre roll feature which is up to 10 seconds. Once motion is detected its saved. So it can record audio before motion but you can only save and acess this if motion was detected. + they do a pretty bad job at recording audio, it's likely it will just filter as background noise

@dxrobins 2 года назад

They don't automatically. However, it does record while you use Live View. So, I could see the thing report that it saw motion, open Live View and watch/record my neighbour. It would be mind-numbingly dull, but I could. That said, you can control (with a limited degree of finesse) the areas that are monitored. In my specific case I could show that it doesn't monitor her front yard for motion and I would like to think that went some way toward showing the monitoring isn't in excess of the legitimate purpose.

@nowillnoway 2 года назад

In answer to your vlogging hypothetical; I'd imagine that depends entirely on the circumstances. If it's a live stream, with the camera clearly visible to a casual observer, not pointed at random people having conversations, in a public place, I'd say you're probably fine - you've had no opportunity to remove the audio, you're not trying to conceal that you're recording (either yourself, or the surroundings), recording/vlogging in and of itself is typically a legitimate interest, and you're in public. A live stream is also typically impermanent, so 'you' aren't holding/processing the data for longer than is necessary for your 'legitimate interest' of babbling incoherently to camera while walking down the road. If you're recording a vlog to upload later, I'd say it becomes a completely different story - you've had the opportunity to process the audio to remove the conversation, and chosen not to. Unless there's a legitimate reason for doing so (i.e. original audio might be required for certain journalistic purposes), leaving the conversation in during post isn't taking reasonable steps to protect the data. If it's B-roll, do you even need or want the original audio? If it's a talk-to-camera recording, have you taken (relatively simple) measures to mute the audio when you're not talking? I'd imagine this gets a lot murkier in the case of a live stream that gets recorded by the streaming platform for later viewing - at what point does that go from the first scenario above to the second? If you also have a recording, should you pull the recorded stream to be replaced with the edited version? How soon do you need to do that (if it's even technically possible on that platform)?

@oddball7483 2 года назад

Interesting case! Does this mean that Supermarkets can use cameras to record customers when they pay at self service tills. They are not recording the actual transaction but the customer! My local supermarket has over 100 hundred cameras in the checkout area. Legitimate purpose or intrusive data capture?

@PippetWhippet 2 года назад

@@StevieProton Every supermarket in my area has a sign up about 5m away from the public areas affected by their cameras, so, yes, they just realised signs are more cost effective

@johnmaxnodiff5875 2 года назад

I have a ring door bell camera. My neighbour across the Road as cameras all round his property. On two occasions we have been thanked by the Police for information in which was used in a court case in the jailing of two burglars that the Police had been after in the area for several years. More recently last week in the breaking in and stealing of contents of a car and a van. This is on going.

@johnmaxnodiff5875 2 года назад

@@willmagicman1289 the Police only used the recording to identify who they were. Not in evidence as they both pleaded guilty. They were well known to them for targeting the elderly. The other on going case caught a well known criminal who targeted carriers vehicle

@stever2583 2 года назад

Very informative, Thank You for this. How does Britain see the automatic "over recording" of previous data? My security system doesn't have the proximity issues... but it does temporarily capture persons conversing as they walk behind my fence ( usually without images, unless very tall). Again - unless something has happened - the video in question will never be permanently collected. I agree with others commenting - this could have been avoided if both parties had communicated to an effective agreement. One of my neighbours asked me about my system, They were shown the entirety of the system and were satisfied.

@boiledelephant 2 года назад

In the UK I believe you're entirely free to incidentally film people in public spaces (but not deliberately/persistently), so if the area behind the fence is a public highway or footpath, you might be fine there.

@1over137 2 года назад

The other issue is of course what data does Amazon now hold on the subjects. The Ring (and all Amazon) equipment comes with a GDPR declaration and privacy/data policy. If you read it, you are consenting to a transfer of data to Amazon and Amazon's affiliates. So, in providing 3rd party data (neighbour, public etc.) to another 3rd party Amazon when technically that would be a breach in GDPR as you have no consent to transfer their data/footage/audio.... ??

@ssss-df5qz 2 года назад

Interesting thought but, the camera isn't on Amazon's property and only provide a cloud service TO the data controller (the person who operates and maintains the camera). It is the data controller that creates any data he processes, his responsibility. That includes, but is not limited to, where and how he stores the data. As an example, if I have a spreadsheet for guests' details at my hotel, sensitive stuff like name/address/copy of passport/licence... then upload that data to an unsecured server belonging to someone else, it is not their fault if that data becomes compromised. It is mine for not considering the safety of the data.

@martinbarthmann 2 года назад

My main concern with RING doorbells (and similar products) is that all footage 24/7 is stored on Amazon servers outside the UK where data protection may not apply. I don't mind the old fashioned CCTV that records at home with no access to the internet. But as a delivery driver, every day I'm on the job, being recorded 5-10 times by a private multinational company incl face recognition - it's a bit freaky. I know Google does the same when I use my android phone. But at least there's a benefit for me too. So the question is who I'm going to ask to remove video footage of my person? The person who owns the doorbell? He may not even be aware that such footage exists.

@onemaninaboat 2 года назад

Amazon (AWS to be precise) has 3 data centres in the UK. For simple reason of cost, noone would bother to ship the data across the world if they can keep it locally. Not to mention latency and resulting bandwidth limits when transferring data across the ocean.

@davideyres955 2 года назад

Also GDPR applies if the subject is a citizen of the European Union. GPDR was introduced while UK was in the EU and so was put in to UK law and then subsequently kept in post brexit.

@TheRealPureBlood Год назад

"Harassment" It is sooooooooo nice to hear this word pronounced correctly! Thanks, BBB. 😁

@chrischarlescook 2 года назад

Really interesting information. Nice one

@alanfox4914 2 года назад

Would it have been the same if the camera was attached to his car. Because we can record everything we can see from a public place. I was a bit worried about my DashCam😬

@diddyreason 2 года назад

I was thinking exactly the same.

@adgeebike9173 2 года назад

Under normal circumstances it is fine to film in a public place, it's not against the law, but it may be on private land. Usually on private land the landowner will have a sign indicating that filming is prohibited.

@alanfox4914 2 года назад

I don't think a sign can overwrite the law?

@klondyke56 2 года назад

Is this any different to permanently on dash cams where a car can be parked on a drive facing the houses opposite ?

@AA-be9rn 2 года назад

Very good point. Once parked they can be so close

@marklittler784 2 года назад

I believe leaving it recording whilst in for service is spying.

@dxrobins 2 года назад

Mine records in a loop. I put a pretty substantial memory card in it, so it's probably a fairly long loop. i would have thought that the fact the footage is automatically deleted after relatively short time and not routinely (or in my case ever) reviewed would make a fair difference to the legitimate purpose aspect.

@thebemusedone1901 2 года назад

@Ed Straker he breached GDPR because the court decided keeping video of your neighbour to harassment isn't a valid use of their data.

@iain3482 2 года назад

I think a dashcam is fine. There are a lot of nuances in the GDPR but generally speaking if your system is installed for a lawful purpose (i.e. preventing crime), you don't keep the footage any longer than necessary (most dashcams will automatically overwrite old footage within hours or days ar most) and you don't use the footage for other purposes (harassing your neighbours, for example) then there shouldn't be a problem.

@greamespens1460 2 года назад

A stark difference between the sensational media and your clear cogent explanation.

@BlackBeltBarrister 2 года назад

Exactly what I thought 🤣

@Stuart_George 2 года назад

Agreed, just left a comment regarding the press coverage of it. They would have you believe that anyone with a Ring doorbell is open for civil action. Very few news reports go into any of the reasons behind the judgment, and the very specific circumstances behind the case. But, nothing new there for main stream media.!!

@greamespens1460 2 года назад

@@Stuart_George Yes it is like being at school and the media are the pupils shouting out the lesson.

@lovevwltd7114 2 года назад

I note that recently a ring doorbell caught an attempt to steel a dog from a young man who was walking the dog on a path the other side of an access road to a close. It would be interesting to know whether that recording would be permissible in a court of law.

@ro63rto 2 года назад

The biggest thing that annoys me about my two neighbours using these doorbells is the fact that the bell rings outside the door as well as in the house. It's really loud and they have multiple visitors AND deliveries and I can hear the bell from inside my property.

@steevoh7186 2 года назад

get some ear plugs

@thomas.parnell7365 2 года назад

To be honest sounds like your house just got crappy sound proofing .is it a modern house if so would explain the shoddy soundproofing.

@FrozenMetroid 2 года назад

They can lower the volume of the doorbell itself through the app. Have a word with them and see if they'll do it for you. I've turned mine down and it's fairly quiet, but just loud enough so the person pressing it knows it's working.

@cherylj7460 2 года назад

That would drive my dogs crazy….and me!

@teamholmez86 Год назад

@@FrozenMetroid i didn't no that will turn mine down as my nabours door is very close to mine she hasn't complained about it but still

@jonb4020 2 года назад

An eminently sensible and reasonable judgement, analysed here by BBB in a clear and rational manner. A win all round for the law, for common sense and for decent behaviour, in my view. 👌✔

@BlackBeltBarrister 2 года назад

Thank you 😊 🙏

@alwaysdisputin9930 2 года назад

Very well explained thanks. I don't like that the neighbouring business's security camera can see into my bathroom but on the other hand it makes it less likely that anyone's going to throw a brick through the window & climb in.

@alwaysdisputin9930 2 года назад

@@willmagicman1289 I don't have a bathroom window: the kitchen window overlooks the bathroom. I just keep the curtains shut. Opening & closing curtains everyday is a lot of work. If I had the money I'd get robot curtains. Robots don't ever make mistakes.

@alwaysdisputin9930 2 года назад

@@willmagicman1289 knob too big must pee whilst standing in kitchen

@JohnRushton 2 года назад

Very interesting. Thank you.

@anthonyg4671 2 года назад

and yet every man and his dog can pull out a phone and record just about anything bonkers .

@salerio61 2 года назад

Not true.

@anthonyg4671 2 года назад

@@salerio61 proofs in the pudding ,so very true.

@stevebeds 2 года назад

I purchased CCTV to film two adjoining houses (rented out) being used for drug manufacture and distribution and I would be happy as a law abiding person to be prosecuted for GDPR and banged up for doing so!

@smitus_hell7564 2 года назад

yep people capture illegal activities, at which they get a slap on the hand while we'd get locked up what??????????????????

@davemaher7352 2 года назад

What’s the situation of a ring doorbell on your property recording communal areas if you have a security or doorman SIA licence and specifically a SIA CCTV licence?

@chuckabutty888 2 года назад

One of my camera's covers my garage and part of a neighbours property to which they do not object. They are putting their house up for sale so could new neighbours object to my camera position or would they have to accept it as it is already in situ and they should take this into consideration before buying the property? If I reposition it the coverage of my garage will not be as effective.

@normalwisdom4048 2 года назад

*Sadly, it's a sign of the chimes* 😜

@BlackBeltBarrister 2 года назад

🤣

@nigeltrump6443 2 года назад

If the camera could help play back a robbery or a murder then I'm sure the judge wouldn't be moaning over who it was recording.

@OGGalleryCrew92 2 года назад

I got told by police in the UK this year was only May time, That CCTV footage took off your own cctv can "NOT" be used in a court of law as it can have been doctored it has got to be off another cctv of the same incident !

@sparky6612 2 года назад

@@OGGalleryCrew92 that is incorrect, footage can be used in court, however a defence team could argue what your saying and it could come under scrutiny and points of law could be argued out between defence and prosecution teams in front of the judge before the trial starts but if it is deemed to have not been altered in any way the judge can rule in favour and allow it to be used.

@cuddlybear_uk 2 года назад

If someone lives in a block of flats and uses a ring doorbell which records audio of people passing the door as they move between floors would that be an issue based on the judgement considering the sole purpose was to protect their property as obviously visitors would not have been consulted to get permission or neighbours who were aware and agreed could alter if the people living there changed? Would they need to remove it or would a notice stating that video and audio may be captured be considered to create informed consent by implication? Also if the recordings were only ever used due to a crime occurring would others have a claim?

@murdoch451 2 года назад

DPA so if I walk into town can i object. dash cam's or just say " hay google" in a public place and see what happens.

@teecee90 2 года назад

From what you say it surely follows that anyone filming anything in public (outside the boundary of their property) has to comply with data protection requirements? I thought there was no right to privacy for people when they are out in public (e.g. walking on a public footpath). So why would a ring camera that captures someone walking past your property on the footpath be covered by data protection. Makes no sense. And another thing .... even if I got the approval of my neighbors - what about general passers by, people visiting the neighbors etc. Obviously you cant get their permission....

@theaylesburycyclist8756 2 года назад

Exactly... This ruling has now effectively made street photography illegal... 🤷‍♂️🙄

@beaulieuonnp593 2 года назад

yes, agreedM I don't understand it either.

@MarriedToTheKGB 2 года назад

I think because it is mounted on a private property or from a private property. You can still film anything you like from a publicly accessible area. The guy can leave his door and go and look at the womans house all day. If it goes through and elecctronic lens from a private dwelling that must be different

@nigelanscombe8658 2 года назад

However, security cameras capture footage for the purpose of “security” and the data used as such. Street photography on the other hand mainly captures images / video for entertainment or the purpose of documenting what is going on.

@jackking5567 2 года назад

Have a story: I buy and sell on eBay. As a bit of interest, I sometimes have a look where some things are headed - it's actually quite interesting - like a sofa based tour of Great Britain. I sell the most unusual of goods and so they must be going to interesting buyers.. I'd gotten a factory siren really cheap. I was going to use it for fun things but it was far too loud. It had to go. I listed it online and waited. Starting price £4 the bids quickly came in. I sold it for 10x what I'd paid. I was happy. Being so unusual, I checked the buyers address. I was stunned. I won't name the location but suffice to say the buyer was slightly OTT with security. They lived mid-terrace and their entire section of roof had a layer of steel mesh over it. The windows had internal and external bars on them. I counted 8 alarm boxes on the walls - 4 front and 4 at the rear, I lost count of the security cameras. I often wonder if their neighbours enjoyed the siren he'd purchased off me.

@jibicusmaximus4827 2 года назад

wonder what their deal was..maybe just a crazy with too much money? something sinister? bbrrr.. who knows lol.

@savemars4383 2 года назад

Lol you really need to say where this took place. It took me few minutes to realize it has no effect on me, (here in the USA) good video 👍

@mrkunleashed5787 2 года назад

Just curious about this because I’m sure the ring camera was on the shed. So does that mean it was directly pointing inside her home

@DavidBrown-sr8di 2 года назад

People put cameras up because they have bad neighbours who have damaged cars and property, I bet you could have a friendly conversation over this

@beaulieuonnp593 2 года назад

exactly, or they steal parcels

@marklittler784 2 года назад

And if your in a good area the bad ones come around shopping 😃😂😃😂😃😂😃😂😃😂😃

@PeterMaddison2483 2 года назад

Asshole neighbours is exactly why we put up CCTV

@gordonlawrence1448 2 года назад

Nope some people are of a "it's not my fault" attitude even if they are drink driving. Friendly conversations do not work with many people. I have one guy on the enclosed estate where I live who is about the most racist person I have ever met. EG peeing through peoples letter boxes verbal abuse and even threatening one tiny 67yo lady. Do you honestly think a person like that can be reasoned with?

@marklittler784 2 года назад

@@gordonlawrence1448 The lady was psychologically obsessed that she was being spied upon and being stalked a state of mind that wasn't justified in this country absolutely saturated with cctv, you really don't believe for one moment that all cameras recording are clearly defined and clearly visible.

@Fallenlords1969 2 года назад

Just put up cameras in the front and back of the property for security purposes, they cover each entrance into the property. Some overlook the street, but not a specific neighbour property, and can on occasion record the comings and goings of people within the street as they are activated if somebody comes within 5m of the camera. I put up big yellow warning signs that CCTV is in operation around the property. I am covered in any way by the visual display of signs or doesn't that matter? And isn't the street itself public land, and I thought you could video/photo without any issue if it was public land. I will go through your videos on CCTV, didn't pay attention before because they were not relevant. Also check out data protection. On the flip side of this, shouldn't the CCTV manufacturers issue some sort of major warning when selling the cameras that there could be likely issues with data protection etc etc.

@LucidAmethyst 2 года назад

I have also made the same point. If the video is pointing to a public space, regardless of what properties face that space, then surely you are free to record whatever you want. I think the issue becomes the collection of private data and voice recordings. If a conversation can be heard from a public space, then it's fair game, but if that conversation is on private land behind a property, then it becomes an issue, but then only if it's recorded. People often stop outside my house to have conversations with neighbours, but they are in a public street, so if my ring doorbell catches that conversation because they are activating my camera, then it's fair game.

@Fallenlords1969 2 года назад

@@LucidAmethyst I think it is just a case of beware, if somebody wants to make a fuss they can and they might have more legal entitlement than you realise. If anybody complains ask for a complaint in writing and then go from there, seek legal advice sooner rather than later. I love how I walk into a minefields blindfolded ... I have an amazing knack for this - thought put the cameras up to increase security, job done. Not put them up and start to worry if I am infringing somebodies civil liberties if they walk in front of my camera talking to somebody else and giving away state secrets etc. There was a survey that said something like 70% of burglars would avoid a house with any sort of camera. But only a small percentage of houses had them. Now I know why. Also the burglars probably avoid houses with cameras to keep away from any Data Protection issues :)

@LucidAmethyst 2 года назад

@@Fallenlords1969 I couldn't agree more. I think the key here is this case is not binding in law, and that there were many specific circumstances. There's some specific caselaw on taking video in public, and also covertly recording conversations, both of which are not illegal. The issue has been muddied by GDPR and therefore the only issue is how you keep the recording, for how long and what personal data that recording holds. It might take a higher court precedent to settle this once and for all, but in the meantime I think it's right to assume you are acting lawfully but with the slim possibility that someone objects.

@richie007brown 2 года назад

So you can be filmed in stores and town centre street's but its not ok to protect your property, next it will be dashcams in cars .I have my ring doorbell for various reasons and will not be removing it for anyone.

@tina-sr9in 2 года назад

I glad I find this the man moved in put a camera listening to every word I've been saying for 7 weeks it's nearly in my room police have done nothing his put it half way down the wall so he can hear every thing how can police do nothing ?? Who should I call ???

@tvandbeermakehomergo 2 года назад

I have one on my front door, but use block out zones as well as a recording activation area so I don't capture the neighbours. They actaully were happy I had one as its a great deterrent for antisocial behavour, and they have one as well now.

@franklettering 2 года назад

tvand..... * have one now, as well.

@fivish 2 года назад

It activates to a movement within the defined zones but records everything within its field.

@andrewwhite986 2 года назад

My neighbour opposite me as a camera that looks directly at my house. There house sits higher up than mine and the bell camera points directly at my front window. I have spoke to them and i was shown the video on there phone. I was told it does not show much. It clearly shows my house and the houses either side. I think that i will be sending a letter by registered post. Also remember that Amazon can study these camera images.

@sting_like_a_BeeCee 2 года назад

What would the case be if my Ring doorbell camera was pointing at my car on my drive but also captured people walking by in the street. Say for example, a serious assault (GBH/Attempt Murder) was to occur at the bottom of my driveway but was public domain and the police wanted to seize the footage as the audio AND video captured vital exchanges between the two parties involved. Would the footage be legally admissible as evidence as per this case or would it potentially contravene the GDPR/Public Space Surveillance legislation discussed in this video?

@jagman84 2 года назад

In such neighbour disputes, the existence or lack of previous skirmishes is often key. They are often the result of years of petty bickering, especially if the complainant was there before the alleged miscreant. An acquaintance of mine had to wait until the ‘neighbour from hell’ moved away before he could move himself. Every time a potential buyer arrived, his neighbour began his antisocial tirade. Naturally, such buyers quickly departed.

@stig350 2 года назад

This sounds like a can of worms. If a shoplifter for insurance finds themselves being tracked constantly by town/City cctv. Would they then have a legal case against said cctv security company for harassment? Because we have seen tv shows about security teams tracking shoplifters throughout town/City centres.

@oddity4650 2 года назад

I don't think they would, because it would be classed as public footage, also I think all shop owners would not have a issue with it, because they also use cctv for protection.

@stig350 2 года назад

@@oddity4650 shop cctv wouldn't be following you round the streets. I do understand that there is no privacy in public but if you are being strategically targeted by street cctv is the question. If you put in a data request and use that to prove you where targeted by street cctv would that class as harassment. The way It seems to me. it would be like me following someone round all day. Wouldn't it be classed as Stalking and harassment.

@oddity4650 2 года назад

@@stig350 oh yes I understand what you mean, in terms of say someone using a cam in public, they might happen to be going the same way as someone, but that person might say they are following them, it is confusing, because Idk how they differentiate something like that as being innocent vs not. I guess aslong as they dont contine you follow them into the pathways to their house then it won't be classed as something bad. Maybe cctv has higher power vs the public, like police might have more power if they are video recording someone in their own home.

@stig350 2 года назад

@@oddity4650 there is a video on RU-vid by pinaci news ring doorbell against the law. It talks about subject access requests to the council if they have cctv pointing towards your property. This falls under the same category as this feed.

@oddity4650 2 года назад

@@stig350 yes I read that if it is facing other areas that are not on their own land, then people have the right to ask for subject access request. I guessing that is mainly used for crimes, missing people, lost items etc, not because some person does not like being on cam, unless it includes audio then it is a questionable subject.