> Devices installed for security purposes cannot trigger wiretapping charges since there's no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place
These ring devices are also installed outside of the US. The law is entirely different in other countries. A statement as "no reasonable expectation of privacy": why not? Just because people could record and film you doesn't mean it's allowed or that it's ok.
For Netherlands: You cannot just have a camera recording the public. Though there's a bit of leeway, meaning if you have a camera recording your property it's logical that it'll record a bit of the road. You just have to minimize that bit. Interestingly enough, police actually encourages the installation of Ring camera's (so specifically Ring over anything else). It seems you can install these if it's just in front of your door and property. However, if they're on a flat (where neighbours need to walk by your door to get to your door), then you cannot have these.
> A statement as "no reasonable expectation of privacy": why not? Just because people could record and film you doesn't mean it's allowed or that it's ok
In the US, it is allowed and is OK, though. Legally, you do not have a right to privacy if you are in a public location as a hallway in an apartment building would be considered. Whether or not it is a nice or considerate behavior is moot when it comes to the law.
I understand that it's US and per law, but "no reasonable expectation of privacy" is more of a judgement. It should always mention that it's due to the law.
The statement probably is entirely reasonable if you're born in the US (as you're used to it). Other countries have other expectations of what's reasonable and normal.
The often repeated "no reasonable expectation of privacy" in a public place to me is entirely odd. It's also something that could change (whether such a change/perception is in e.g. NL or in the US).
Technology makes things possible that weren't possible before at all. Meaning, you can store camera recordings for a ridiculously long time. From my buildings security (again: NL) I understood that legally they cannot store such recordings over 28 days. Above that things become difficult (possible but quite a hassle).
In the past people could see what you're doing in a public space. But nowadays you can easily be recorded and that recording could be stored forever. That was never the case before.
As a result, things such as "no reasonable expectation of privacy" should change with the changed circumstances, IMO.
In US privacy (case) law. "Reasonable expectation of privacy" is a specific term that determines whether it's okay to record things. There is a lot of case law around what does and doesn't imply a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Hence people are using the term in a specific legal way, rather than saying "I don't think it is reasonable to expect privacy here", they are saying "I think legal precedent would make a judge rule there is no 'reasonable expectation of privacy' here".
Hey bkor, thanks for the interesting information on CCTV laws in the Netherlands. I am curious from a photographic perspective. What if I visit NL and I take some photos of buildings and happen to capture pictures of the public? (Its on my list of places to see someday) Can you not post those photos publicly online without consent?
Sadly I don't find much on NL would be cool to build a chart to contrast and compare laws in each nation as they pertain to video/photo/audio recording in public.
> For Netherlands: You cannot just have a camera recording the public. Though there's a bit of leeway, meaning if you have a camera recording your property it's logical that it'll record a bit of the road. You just have to minimize that bit.
This is simply not at all true. You can film anything you want in public. I believe the laws around publishing photographs or films of other people is a bit more complex though.
Pointing a permanent security camera at a public space as a private person really is illegal.
This is different from occasionally using a handheld camera.
Because one is surveillance that is meaningfully different from what you could do just by watching someone, and the other is not (this is my argument, not sure whether this is the legal argument in NL)
Well that scenario is prohibited by the GDPR (though I’m not sure if different authorities would have differing views on that). But the statement that you cannot film public scenes or the people who happen to be in them is simple false.
This article is about a Ring camera and something installed on a door. These things are static and do not move around. That is what I was referring to.
You could read this as something else, but IMO it was pretty obvious what I was referring to. And for static cameras I'm entirely correct. For other cameras there's been various new restrictions for them as well.
Your summary of "cannot film public scenes or the people who happen to be in them is simple false" for one distorts what I wrote, secondly, if you do this with a static camera, you will have a problem and your statement is _not_ true.
Friends had a "crazy lady" with cameras pointing at public space. It took a while, but eventually the cameras were removed. Something similar you can find via Google, plus (work) building security mentions the same.
Most of Western Europe has pretty strict surveilance laws. The GDPR applies even when recording people in private space, e.g. visitors, employees or ATMs inside bancs. Recording public space on a permanent base is a big nono. Accidentally recording strangers for a one off video is no problem.
Then again, after the Brussels terrorist attacks, the police managed to reconstruct the path of a terrorist pretty well by puzzling together all kinds of recordings, so my impression is enforcement is lax as long as nobody complains.
These ring devices are also installed outside of the US. The law is entirely different in other countries. A statement as "no reasonable expectation of privacy": why not? Just because people could record and film you doesn't mean it's allowed or that it's ok.
For Netherlands: You cannot just have a camera recording the public. Though there's a bit of leeway, meaning if you have a camera recording your property it's logical that it'll record a bit of the road. You just have to minimize that bit. Interestingly enough, police actually encourages the installation of Ring camera's (so specifically Ring over anything else). It seems you can install these if it's just in front of your door and property. However, if they're on a flat (where neighbours need to walk by your door to get to your door), then you cannot have these.