I know that because I do a lot of street photography and there is no law in the UK forbidding photography of people in public spaces.
Again show me in GDPR where it expressly forbids marching a face to a public dataset.
Comment on ‘FuckLAPD.com’ Lets Anyone Use Facial Recognition to Instantly Identify Cops
General_Effort@lemmy.world 1 day agoI know for a fact
Do you remember why you “know” this? Just curious.
I would need a law showing that matching a face against publicly available datasets of faces is illegal as that seems insane and difficult to police.
Surely you have noticed that there is a lot of criticism of the GDPR and EU tech regulation.
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 1 day ago
General_Effort@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
I know that because I do a lot of street photography and there is no law in the UK forbidding photography of people in public spaces,
I didn’t write there was one. It sounds like you “know” that photography is “protected” because you need that to be true.
it’s quite easy for you to Google this
Indeed. For anyone who’s not good at googling things, I recommend the UK ICO.
but I can’t provide you with a law condoning it as that’s not how it works.
That’s true. You can’t because you are wrong. You should know that your take on the GDPR is nonsense. It sounds like you violate it on a habitual basis.
Again show me in GDPR where it expressly forbids marching a face to a public dataset.
What do you mean “again”?
The GDPR forbids this in, of course, Article 6 and, more particularly, Article 9, but also gives exceptions.
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 18 hours ago
You seem to want to me prove that a law doesn’t exist where it’s much easier for you to show me a law doesn’t exist.
You can read this House of Commons debate on the topic Here
Police officers have the discretion to ask people not to take photographs for public safety or security reasons, but the taking of photographs in a public place is not subject to any rule or statute. There are no legal restrictions on photography in a public place, and there is no presumption of privacy for individuals in a public place
Or you can read This debate from the House of Lords.
The taking of photographs in a public place is not subject to any rules or statute. There are no legal restrictions on photography in a public place … and the Home Secretary … expressed our desire to ensure that people are free and able to take photographs in public places
Seems pretty simple really and based on your lack of understanding of this then i have to assume you don’t understand the other topics you mention and therefore without you providing evidence I’ll go about my day.
General_Effort@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
I have provided the requested Articles in the GDPR. “Presumption of privacy” is not a concept in the GDPR. The GDPR is not a privacy law. It is concerned with data protection.
Debates in either Chamber of UK parliament are not a source of law. Especially not when they took place a decade before the GDPR came into force.
Do you need any further help?
OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
Commercial versions of these systems exist in the UK.
theguardian.com/…/shopper-facewatch-watchlist-39p…
The Gdpr and AI act make these things harder to do, but not automatically illegal.
Yeah, and some of it is even true.
General_Effort@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
As I wrote, the UK does not have the AI Act. This is also a case where EU GDPR and UK GDPR diverge.
Finally, I never claimed it’s automatically illegal.
Most of it, in my experience. I do not know why this community is so committed to disinformation.