log in
register

BBC: AA calls for crackdown on sharing dashcam video

  • This topic has 15 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by brooksby.
  • Creator
    Topic
  • May 22, 2017 at 2:47 pm #27143
    brooksby

    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.”

  • Creator
    Topic
Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • May 23, 2017 at 8:34 am #893763
    0
    brooksby
    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…

    May 23, 2017 at 6:30 am #893761
    0
    hawkinspeter
    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.

    May 23, 2017 at 6:22 am #893759
    0
    reliablemeatloaf

    Voyeurism?

    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!

    May 23, 2017 at 5:59 am #893757
    0
    gmac101

    In addition to what others

    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.  

    May 23, 2017 at 5:59 am #893755
    0
    gmac101

    In addition to what others

    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.  

    May 23, 2017 at 5:31 am #893753
    0
    brooksby

    We all know that, if

    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.

    May 22, 2017 at 10:43 pm #893751
    0
    muppetteer

     

     

    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.  

     

    May 22, 2017 at 8:19 pm #893749
    0
    pjm60
    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?

    May 22, 2017 at 6:49 pm #893747
    0
    Dropped
    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.

    May 22, 2017 at 6:07 pm #893745
    0
    PaulCee52

    There are certain legal

    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.

     

    May 22, 2017 at 4:57 pm #893743
    0
    Anonymous

    Next they’ll accuse cyclecam
    Next they’ll accuse cyclecam users of crime shaming.

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

    May 22, 2017 at 4:20 pm #893741
    0
    severs1966

    “AA calls for victims to be

    “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?

    May 22, 2017 at 4:08 pm #893739
    0
    hawkinspeter

    Last time that I checked, the

    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.

    May 22, 2017 at 3:53 pm #893737
    0
    vonhelmet

    People wouldn’t be using them

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

    May 22, 2017 at 3:41 pm #893735
    0
    peted76

    I see the PR agency for the

    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.

  • Author
    Replies
Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.