Is It Illegal To Have Microphone On Camera/cctv Kit

[norman]

^^ But that would involve common sense...

[secureiam]

common sense the impossible dream

[duffbeer2015]

Think its over complicated, should be able to record anything that you could see or hear without any specialist equipment

 

Which for example means I can see and hear (usually with a window open) my neighbours in their yards, see roof (bungalow next door), but not inside their home from my own windows at my property without using any equipment. I can hear my neighbours through the wall when they raise there voices but that's rare.

 

I can also hear people walking/ driving past if a window is open, I am no more invading their privacy, so I would say those images and audio being recorded are not an invasion of their privacyas they are publically broadcast for anyone to see or hear in the vicinity.

 

The distribution of those images and conversations to anyone else is an invasion of privacy (my neighbour doesn't expect me to film them sunbathing in their back yard and publish on the net for everyone to see). In relation to capturing images and audio of a person or persons committing or believed to be committing a crime, the evidence should be submitted to the relevant authorities and they can deem with how that information is publically shared in order to capture/ eliminate the suspects from the alleged crimes.

 

 

May be I am thinking this too simply and missing some important points.

 

 

No, I completely agree. I think the narrow interpretation that the ECJ gave it was wrong. I think it was wrong to blanketly rule that any public space falls outside of the domestic exemption, like you say, it is what you do with it that counts i.e. if the purpose is still to protect your own home and your own family then it should still fall under the exemption. I mean, some people's property CCTV will have no choice but to film even a limited amount of public footpath (for example) because

there front door might lead directly onto the pavement/highway....

[luggsey]

What about dash cam cctv?

[al-yeti]

What about dash cam cctv?

Dash cam?

Exempt if your speeding and have a pcb sticking out of the window

[charlie6]

"....Saying all of that, maybe the ICO will introduce an easier and cheaper option.."

 

A goverment department handing out 'CHEAPER options'.... Never known that to happen in my entire life.

[duffbeer2015]

I don't want to confuse anyone - but I thought I would air my thoughts on this.

 

It sounds over complicated, but, like Charlie said above regarding EU law overriding UK law. You would expect on shared competency issues (i.e. agreement in what the EU courts and EU institutions can make policy on) would be agreed and be unified across the continent to help and assist member states meet there own obligations. But here we have a judgment which potentially creates an imbalance of Article 8 rights under the ECHR. This imbalance potentially creates a liability on the UK state for compensation or damages or rectification (or whatever other remedy) for simply following what the court of justice of the EU has told 'us' to follow. Potentially leaving the Information Commissioner and joe public in an uncomfortable and uncertain position. You would think by saying any and all public space is covered would simplify the situation, but I think it makes things worse. It fails to take account of the necessity that some people may have to film those areas because they are unable not to film those areas if they wish to protect their own property by way of cctv.

 

From one EU law book I have, it reads that (and I don't want to confuse anyone that hasn't got the foggiest of what I am talking about) it is possible for action to be taken at the European Court of Human Rights actually against an EU institution

(which includes the European Court of Justice or the Court of Justice of the European Union as it is called now). It says:-

 

'In.....Cantoni -v- France App No 17862/91 the court of human rights ruled that the fact that a national measure was adopted (here the interpretation of s.36 DPA because of the EU directive) in order to comply with an EU Directive, and indeed replicated that Directive almost exactly, did not affect the State's obligation to ensure that the measure complied with the ECHR...'

 

So, it is quite possible for the ECJ judgment on the facts of that case, where I believe it found that the appellant was filming a public space because he was filming the front door of someone else's property to be broken down into tiny fact based

results. The end result could be that when interpreting that judgment, the UK courts (because they have to interpret any and all legislation in a manner compatible - s.3 HRA 1998) could construe a 'public place' (for the purposes of s.36 DPA) as being any public place where it is not strictly necessary for the domestic cctv operator to film in order to meet his or her personal or family protection rights.

 

That to me would mean that if joe blogs is filming the 1x1 meter public street space at his front door, that he / she still falls within the exemption so long as it is necessary and proportionate to do so.

 

It also says in Article 6(2) of the Treaty for the European Union that:-

 

'The union shall accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Such accession shall not affect the Union's competences as defined in the Treaties.'

[charlie6]

Well Snap Dufbeer ! I currently have at least a dozen books on The EU. You know what I think ? I couldn't give a Monkeys what they say and the quicker we leave that 'jobs for the boys' crew the better. Then we can start cleaning up our own career politicians and their jolly boys outing 'opening of parliament' and a few thousand other problems besetting this island...But you still haven't made it absolutely plain and clear...can I use my camcorder with audio where and whenver ? Time for some straight forward answers I think.

[al-yeti]

Europe doesn't care about microphones unless they make enough money out of u.k

[charlie6]

Bang on target again Al-yeti (correct as usual)...and I was only kidding (in another post) about you plotting Goncall's downfall