Neighbour wins privacy row over smart doorbell and cameras

Soldato
Joined
22 Nov 2006
Posts
23,304
House on the opposite side of the street to me has a webcam stuck in the window which affords him direct views into the front rooms of about three houses. Those in the houses affected have tried talking to him, but, despite him speaking perfect English, he plays the 'me no speak English' card each and every time. The police have been out a few times too, they've told him to get rid - he just ignores them.

Burn it out with a laser pointer :D
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Dec 2009
Posts
10,254
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Fairhurst-v-Woodard-Judgment-1.pdf

Some interesting comments within that.



:cry:



He had a camera mounted on his neighbours gable end wall, at high level, overlooking the next neighbour's property and garden but none of his own property, hardly surprising he's been done for it :p



:cry:

Haha, excellent find. Hope he gets absolutely destroyed in damages after the year he’s out her through, and then his stupid lies to the court.
 
Capodecina
Soldato
Joined
30 Jul 2006
Posts
12,129
Judge Melissa Clarke said the video images and audio files that the Ring doorbell and cameras captured of the neighbour, Dr Mary Fairhurst, were her personal data. The ruling stated that the devices’ ability to capture conversations at ranges of between 40ft and 68ft away was excessive. (LINK)
Conversation 40ft away? :eek:
Why :confused:
 
Caporegime
Joined
21 Jun 2006
Posts
38,372
Some updated guidance and laws is all that's needed.

They should record movement and nothing else with an attempt from the owner to not point it at others front doors, although that's not always doable

No they aren't. The laws already in place are fine enough.

This moron had a camera which didn't cover any of his own property. It doesn't matter if it covers other peoples property so long as it can be argued it's main purpose is to protect your own property. Therefore at least 50% of it should be covering your property.

Also why shouldn't they record sound? I see no reason not to. You do realise shops have cctv right? So do many shopping centres, arenas, football stadiums, etc. This was a one off. Anyone dumb enough to have a camera pointed nowhere near their own property obviously should get done for it.
 
Soldato
Joined
4 Apr 2003
Posts
7,965
Isn't this the legal case where there had been sustained invasion of privacy and harassment issues prior to this ruling; did the initial article miss out some key elements?
 
Caporegime
Joined
26 Dec 2003
Posts
25,666
CCTV cameras generally point downwards towards the ground at a point of entry and don't record audio, I think the point being made here is you should be able to sit/sunbathe in your own garden without a neighbours device recording your actions and conversation.

People have a right to privacy, if some idiot wants to put cameras/microphones all over his property because he wants to pretend he's a contestant on Big Brother that's fine but you've still got to respect your neighbours right to privacy on their own premises.

Amazon, which made both the doorbell and the cameras, said that customers must "respect their neighbours' privacy, and comply with any applicable laws when using their Ring device."
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,899
Isn't this the legal case where there had been sustained invasion of privacy and harassment issues prior to this ruling; did the initial article miss out some key elements?

Seems to - like the press have turned up and shown photos of the people outside their home but what would be more relevant is showing where the CCTV covers (and blurring out the bits which are the neighbours garden etc...)

The audio seems to be an issue with the doorbell but the issue with cameras seems to have been one the guy had covering his shed/car at the back (and including the neighbours garden) plus one at the front with included her from garden/gate.. rather than any footage from the ring camera.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Apr 2009
Posts
3,973
Location
Warrington
It sounds like there are quite a few exacerbating factors in this particular case, but would be interesting if it set some kind of precedent for doorbell cameras.

I was under the impression that technically you need planning permission for any camera that can see anything other than your private property, but in practice this was never enforced. For example the police even recommend 'ring' cameras to people, without any caveats about making sure it only records their own property (when obviously for most houses a doorbell camera will record the road outside and other houses on the street as well as the owner's property).

Would be really interesting if it turns out that amazon can be held responsible for its ring doorbells breaching planning laws given how it manages the network. Biggest violation of planning law in history? :D:p
 

mrk

mrk

Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
100,008
Location
South Coast
When setting up a Ring doorbell camera the app runs you through all of the privacy and security features available. You kind of have to decide whether you want to enable them or not so not adding privacy zoning etc is a conscious decision etc. I'm new to doorbell cams but I got one recently and set it up to motion zone out my garden only. It is capable of recording audio all the way to the road across the garden but is only triggered when motion activates within the garden zone.

What I find amusing is that there are a small but loud mouthed minority of people who see stuff like this and claim their privacy is being breached. Yet these same people won't bat an eyelid at other things in daily life that actively spy on them by design and track their activities whether online or offline (where applicable). Some people just want something to moan about to feel some kind of self importance lol.

House on the opposite side of the street to me has a webcam stuck in the window which affords him direct views into the front rooms of about three houses. Those in the houses affected have tried talking to him, but, despite him speaking perfect English, he plays the 'me no speak English' card each and every time. The police have been out a few times too, they've told him to get rid - he just ignores them.

Do you genuinely think that a webcam is capable of resolving the details through the living room windows of multiple houses opposite? Seems a lot of these cases are falling foul of technical knowledge or lack off on what is actually possible these days and what isn't. A webcam is not capable of that sort of long range resolution. They are designed for short range. Has any of the neighbours actually gone to have a friendly chat to see what it's like? Imagine if one of the houses got broken into one day and his webcam captured a suspect or vehicle that could be used as evidence or something else that happens. There are pros and cons of everything really and it's up to people to weigh up a fine balance and deal with things in a sensible way.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
13 Oct 2006
Posts
90,821
Do you genuinely think that a webcam is capable of resolving the details through the living room windows of multiple houses opposite?

True if it is a webcam - higher end CCTV or some other types of video cameras/camcorders can do that though.

Where I live has external CCTV which caused some dispute with the neighbours - a bit of six to one half a dozen to the other but it could have been better positioned on the side in view of them even though the setup does not look into their property at all - if it had been mounted slightly lower down I doubt they'd have even noticed or bothered about it and would still have had the same view and out of reach of tampering more or less.
 

mrk

mrk

Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
100,008
Location
South Coast
That's a little more different! Personally I'd have just had a friendly word and then got a feel for what it's all about. YOu can quickly gauge intentions/usage within a few moments and then work out whether it's legit or not.
 

mrk

mrk

Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
100,008
Location
South Coast
And it has nothing to do with Ring anyway! I have now read multiple news articles on this story and they all headline Ring Doorbell camera cautions when the actual case is not even about a doorbell camera. I guess they needed to pad out the news article so here we are.
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Apr 2009
Posts
24,796
And it has nothing to do with Ring anyway! I have now read multiple news articles on this story and they all headline Ring Doorbell camera cautions when the actual case is not even about a doorbell camera. I guess they needed to pad out the news article so here we are.

There were 4 cameras in discussion.

1 Ring Spotlight Camera on the shed
1 Ring Spotlight Camera on the neighbours wall (the main problem camera)
1 Ring Doorbell Camera by the door
1 Nest Window Camera in the window

Typical lazy journalism all around, unable to notice that Ring make more than just doorbell cameras.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Oct 2002
Posts
8,234
Location
Near Cheltenham
I'm just about to recommission by IP Cameras / NVR.

The front cameras (there are 2 to cover the entire frontage), have masks set to black out my neighbours drives etc (so I can't see any single part of their property), but I can see the road in front of my house and the public green area opposite, I have a car parked on the road, which I want to obviously keep an eye on.. I've been under the impression that this is OK, as long as I don't record audio or video of anything the neighbours are doing on their 'land' then all is good? No issues in recording the public green opposite the public road where the car is parked?
 
Caporegime
Joined
21 Jun 2006
Posts
38,372
I'm just about to recommission by IP Cameras / NVR.

The front cameras (there are 2 to cover the entire frontage), have masks set to black out my neighbours drives etc (so I can't see any single part of their property), but I can see the road in front of my house and the public green area opposite, I have a car parked on the road, which I want to obviously keep an eye on.. I've been under the impression that this is OK, as long as I don't record audio or video of anything the neighbours are doing on their 'land' then all is good? No issues in recording the public green opposite the public road where the car is parked?

The fact the police have approached me 3 times in the past year to ask for me to go through footage to see if I saw anything happen on the main road tells me they don't care if your cameras aren't only covering your own property.

This guy had a camera that never covered any of his property at all. Any moron should have known that wasn't okay. So long as you can argue they are to protect your property it's fine.
 
Back
Top Bottom