Comment on Big Brother just got an upgrade. Starting December, Amazon’s Ring cameras will scan and recognize faces. Don’t want to be in their database? Too bad — walk past a Ring and your face can be stored...

• boovard@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Same in Belgium, and Tesla is even having issues with it’s “sentinel” feature being ruled illegal 🙏

  source
• JohnAnthony@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  It is more specific in France, but I actually dug around regulations a year ago when the other homeowners in my building wanted to install a security camera. The common parts of a residential building are considered somewhere in between public and private.

  The short version is you need majority approval, the tape can only be accessed if something happens, you can’t film apartments doors or windows and as few people as possible may have access. Which put quite a damper on my neighbours who were already celebrating how they would watch who enters and leaves the building at all times.
  Bunch of fucking weirdos.

  source
• jpeps@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I wish we had more protection in the UK. Technically the law allows filming public property as long as it is not the direct focus, eg you film your front door and catch some of the street. But it’s not policed at all. Living on a terraced main road I cant leave my house without being filmed by at least 5 different neighbour’s cameras from a range of different American or Chinese companies. One camera literally just points towards a window of my own home. It’s insane, I feel like they’re all just standing outside watching me.

  Technically, I have the right to ask to see the footage they record and ask for adjustments to angles etc, but it’s left to individuals to do. I’d have to have an awkward individual conversation with a bunch of strangers (sad but true) about something I doubt they even consider an issue.

  I’d love to see some legislation that would require some publically accessible way to review what’s in camera for doorbell cams, but I guess that would just be seen as helping criminals.

  source
• Dave@lemmy.nz ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  That’s really interesting. Is it specifically security cameras?

  Can you generally take videos of people in public places? Photos?

  source

  • stoy@lemmy.zip ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Normal cameras and video cameras are fine, the key point is that the camera should not be fixed for continuous monitoring of public spaces.

    Dashcams were a grey area, most are fixed mounted to a car with the capability to continously record so at first only cameras you manually place and trigger when about to drive were permitted, then the law was loosened further, and now I believe they are permitted.

    Now here we have an interesting fact about the Swedish court system, you can present any evidence regardless of if it was collected through legal or illegal means, and the court will decide on if they will accept it or not.

    The illegal part only comes into play in a separate case where you have to stand trial for whatever illegal act you did.

    source

    • Dave@lemmy.nz ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I found this page explaining that it’s not that it’s illegal (necessarily, keep reading), but that there is a GDPR exemption for private property and if you’re filming areas the public access then you need to comply with GDPR. The page says for dashcams you need to comply with GDPR as well.

      This page says it’s generally not allowed to record, but if you read the Swedish version is has a flow chart (that I can’t read 😅).

      What most interests me is that it keeps referring to the GDPR as the reason why you can’t record public areas (or your neighbours). I’m not in Europe and don’t know much about the GDPR but why is Sweden special with these rules, why aren’t all countries in the European Union limiting the use of security cameras on public areas?

      source

      • Wrufieotnak@feddit.org ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Can’t speak for other countries, but Sweden’s rules sound similar to Germany’s. You are allowed to monitor your own ground, but not public ground without good reason. Which makes cameras like Ring not explicitly forbidden, but you are not allowed to place them in a way which would monitor the street for example.

        And regarding your question in the other comment: in Germany you are allowed to take pictures in public spaces, but you are not allowed to publish them when people are the main focus and identifiable. So you take a picture of Neuschwanstein and some random people are small in the foreground? Not important, so you are free to upload it to your internet blog. But if you film a couple having an argument in front of Neuschwanstein, then you are not allowed to upload it, because the focus is on the couple. You would need to anonymize their faces and voices.

        And why is it not all countries? Because they didn’t see it as necessary to have same rules everywhere in EU, probably due to different values, making it hard to getting a compromise. Or that it wasn’t seen as important enough to bother establishing the same rule everywhere.

        source
      • stoy@lemmy.zip ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Before GDPR came, we had PUL, PersonUppgiftsLagen, The Law of Personal Information.

        It was stricter than GDPR is now.

        source
    • Deceptichum@quokk.au ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Now here we have an interesting fact about the Swedish court system, you can present any evidence regardless of if it was collected through legal or illegal means, and the court will decide on if they will accept it or not.

      The illegal part only comes into play in a separate case where you have to stand trial for whatever illegal act you did.

      That’s a good way to handle it.

      source