Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

forum

BBC: AA calls for crackdown on sharing dashcam video

Hmm...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39999009

"New rules may be needed to control the use of video taken by dashboard cameras, the AA has warned.

Motorists who persistently share dashcam video could be accused of voyeurism, according to the motoring organisation.

It said too many drivers post videos on social media without considering the impact on the motorists shown.

In many cases drivers are pilloried for actions that are not their fault, the AA said.

As many as 15% of British motorists now use a dashcam, according to a poll of AA members, with one in a hundred planning to share their footage on social media like YouTube.

Edmund King, the AA president, told The Times: "While most drivers with dashcams fit them to protect themselves from 'crash for cash' fraudsters or dangerous drivers, there is an element of vehicular voyeurism from some individuals."

The motoring organisation said it was not in favour of banning dashcam use, but said the next government should consider tighter rules, like those in force in other European countries:

    In Luxembourg, dashcam use is prohibited
    In Germany and Austria their use is "highly discouraged"
    In Portugal and Belgium users need the other person's permission to share video online
    In Italy, number plates are private, and must be blurred in footage

On the other hand, the AA said sharing footage of bad driving can have its advantages.

Such publicity can send a warning to stupid and irresponsible drivers, it said. The organisation recommends sending such footage to the police, who can investigate any incident fairly."

If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.

Add new comment

15 comments

Avatar
reliablemeatloaf | 6 years ago
1 like

Voyeurism?

An accepted definition of voyeurism is:

"... the practice of obtaining sexual gratification by looking at sexual objects or acts, especially secretively."

I don't know about you, but it takes more than a Vauxhall Corsa to get me going!

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to reliablemeatloaf | 6 years ago
5 likes

reliablemeatloaf wrote:

Voyeurism?

An accepted definition of voyeurism is:

"... the practice of obtaining sexual gratification by looking at sexual objects or acts, especially secretively."

I don't know about you, but it takes more than a Vauxhall Corsa to get me going!

I think the AA are admitting that they film lots of dogging.

Avatar
gmac101 | 6 years ago
0 likes

In addition to what others have said about the lack of expectation of privacy on the roads, when I was a juror the judge explained that the inside of a car was also not a "private place" despite what many people may think.  The AA really are on weak ground here.  

Avatar
brooksby replied to gmac101 | 6 years ago
2 likes

gmac101 wrote:

In addition to what others have said about the lack of expectation of privacy on the roads, when I was a juror the judge explained that the inside of a car was also not a "private place" despite what many people may think.  The AA really are on weak ground here.  

Except that most people think that the inside of their car is a private place - the inside's just another room in their house (internet, sound system, comfy chairs, etc), and the outside's an extension of their body, the way some people react if you touch it...

Avatar
gmac101 | 6 years ago
2 likes

In addition to what others have said about the lack of expectation of privacy on the roads, when I was a juror the judge explained that the inside of a car was also not a "private place" despite what many people may think.  The AA really are on weak ground here.  

Avatar
brooksby | 6 years ago
0 likes

We all know that, if something like that was put in place, they'd want to restrict headcams on cyclists and would find a way to keep dashcams for the hard pressed motorists. The idea that some motorists are shamed by people sharing videos of something bad/stupid that wasn't their fault... Oh, I don't know. Remember: to many motorists, absolutely nothing is their fault.

Avatar
PaulCee52 | 6 years ago
1 like

There are certain legal requirements covering the use of CCTV cameras for both home and commercial use - Data Protection Act, warning signage etc...

I have often wondered about the legality of dashcams and, by implication, helmet cams etc - after all, buses, taxis commercial vehicles and similar do carry a notice to say that images are being recorded and recordings should only be kept for a certain amount of time.

 

Avatar
Dropped replied to PaulCee52 | 6 years ago
6 likes

PaulCee52 wrote:

There are certain legal requirements covering the use of CCTV cameras for both home and commercial use - Data Protection Act, warning signage etc...

I have often wondered about the legality of dashcams and, by implication, helmet cams etc - after all, buses, taxis commercial vehicles and similar do carry a notice to say that images are being recorded and recordings should only be kept for a certain amount of time.

 

There are no legal requirements governing the use of video or photographs in a public place. The Data Protection Act governs the use and storage of personal information held by public or private bodies, NOT photo's or video held by private individuals taken in a public space.

Warning signs are just that and are not a requirement in law. Taxis and commercial vehicles  carry warning signs in an effort to fend off public liability claims (civil not criminal) and to prevent people from carrying out nefarious activities.

Avatar
pjm60 replied to PaulCee52 | 6 years ago
1 like

PaulCee52 wrote:

There are certain legal requirements covering the use of CCTV cameras for both home and commercial use - Data Protection Act, warning signage etc...

I have often wondered about the legality of dashcams and, by implication, helmet cams etc - after all, buses, taxis commercial vehicles and similar do carry a notice to say that images are being recorded and recordings should only be kept for a certain amount of time.

 

 

What could the distinction between a dashcam, helmet cam, gopgro on selfie stick, mobile phone taking a video, and phone taking a picture be?

Avatar
muppetteer replied to pjm60 | 6 years ago
1 like

 

PaulCee52 wrote:

There are certain legal requirements covering the use of CCTV cameras for both home and commercial use - Data Protection Act, warning signage etc...

 

This is true, as sometimes those CCTV cameras are often on private property, or able to record people where there is an expectation of privacy, i.e. inside somewhere. Whereas if they are on the public highway, there is no expectation of privacy. The issue isn't so much as one of publishing a video made in public, its the identifying of those video'd, which is quite easy where there are car reg plates.

However, in the big scheme of things this is pretty minor. If this helps people drive better and act responsibily as they feel they could be video'd, I'm all for it.  

 

Avatar
Yorkshire wallet | 6 years ago
6 likes

Next they'll accuse cyclecam users of crime shaming.

'Driver traumatised by online footage of him running over cyclist '

Avatar
severs1966 | 6 years ago
5 likes

"AA calls for victims to be prevented from having evidence that perpetrators crashed into them"

What's the matter with the AA? Why are they trying to support and encourage bad driving?

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 6 years ago
7 likes

Last time that I checked, the public roads are public and there's no expectation of privacy when in public.

I'd prefer it if the insurance companies fitted dashcams to insured vehicles and then used the footage to decide liability for traffic incidents. That way, people wouldn't feel the need to fit their own dashcam and the insurance companies have no reason to share the footage on social media.

Avatar
vonhelmet | 6 years ago
1 like

People wouldn't be using them if they thought insurance companies or the police were actually going to do any work to determine fault.

Avatar
peted76 | 6 years ago
2 likes

I see the PR agency for the AA have realised they'd better do some work before their contract runs out.... frankly I'd fire em if that's all they can come up with.

Latest Comments