Is there a privacy issue with video doorbells?

[Hooverfish]

Mine isn't even connected to electricity. It's an old servant's bell hung in the porch. Very loud. Finds us if we don't happen to hear someone arriving into the yard... but more seriously, there is a privacy issue if the Ring doorbell is photographing passing people on the public road to be aware of - it sometimes needs to be adjusted only to view people on your property at your door.

 

[Tickle]

there is a privacy issue if the Ring doorbell is photographing passing people on the public road to be aware of...

No the isn't. There is no privacy issue if you are capturing people passing on the road, so long as it is for personal use and you don't publish it or use the footage commercially.

Pointing the camera so you can see into another person's home is a different matter, as one would have an expectation of privacy in situ. The same cannot be said for a public street.

 

[Hooverfish]

No the isn't. There is no privacy issue if you are capturing people passing on the road, so long as it is for personal use and you don't publish it or use the footage commercially.

Pointing the camera so you can see into another person's home is a different matter, as one would have an expectation of privacy in situ. The same cannot be said for a public street.

Tickle - you might want to read this: https://www.dataprotection.ie/en/dpc-guidance/blogs/cctv-home

 

[Tickle]

Tickle - you might want to read this...

You may want to read it yourself. The first section confirms my point exactly:

The scope of data protection legislation is set out in Article 2 of the GDPR, which states that the GDPR does not apply to the processing of personal data by a natural person in the course of a purely personal or household activity.

This provision is commonly referred to as the household, or domestic, exemption.

What this means is if an internal security camera system is used solely in the course of the homeowner’s personal or household activity, then they will not be subject to the same obligations as a data controller would be under data protection law – so you don’t need to put up signs to make visitors aware, or provide access to the footage from the cameras.

Furthermore:

The Court of Justice of the European Union has established in the case of ‘Ryneš’ that the use of a domestic CCTV system that covers a public space falls within the scope of data protection law.

This does not mean you cannot record activity in a public space. It means that it falls under data protection law and you have to process it as such (i.e. do not share it or publish it). So long as the recording is captured for the purpose of your own home security and it's kept private, then there is no issue. If you are recording it for other purposes, then you need consent.


GDPR Article 6, Section 1 outlines it clearly. In the case of the smart video doorbell, either (d), (e) or (f) could apply:

1. Processing shall be lawful only if and to the extent that at least one of the following applies:

a. the data subject has given consent to the processing of his or her personal data for one or more specific purposes;

b. processing is necessary for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is party or in order to take steps at the request of the data subject prior to entering into a contract;

c. processing is necessary for compliance with a legal obligation to which the controller is subject;

d. processing is necessary in order to protect the vital interests of the data subject or of another natural person;

e. processing is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority vested in the controller;

f. processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or by a third party, except where such interests are overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject which require protection of personal data, in particular where the data subject is a child.

There is no issue so long as there is a legitimate reason for the recording (e.g. home security) and it's kept private.

 

[Hooverfish]

I think m'luds might disagree with you. You don't have consent (a), it's not a vital interest (d), it's not a public interest (e) and it's for your apparent convenience and not for "legitimate interests"(f).

 

[Tickle]

You don't have consent (a)

You don't need consent. This is the point of the debate.

It's not a vital interest (d), it's not a public interest (e) and it's for your apparent convenience and not for "legitimate interests"(f).

It really depends on the individual circumstances. Protecting your property from criminal trespass or break-in is a legitimate interest.


To be absolutely abundantly clear, we are not talking about recording the general public willy-nilly or creeping on the woman who jogs past your house everyday. We are discussing the incidental recording of passers-by who may be in frame in a situation where a video camera exists primarily to protect the security of your home.

 

[Hooverfish]

I disagree that "protecting your property" outweighs privacy.

Incidental recording of passers-by is covered in the document I linked. It specifically mentions that if you cannot avoid doing this then you need to abide by the CCTV regulations: https://www.dataprotection.ie/sites...a Controllers_October19_For Publication_0.pdf

That means at a minimum, you must notify people you are recording using a legible notice, you must have a method of providing a copy of their data to a passer-by and you must supply contact details of the data controller.

You're not a public authority. You are a private citizen. You don't get to record the data of other citizens in a public space just because you feel like it. There are workarounds such as systems that can blur the faces of those in the public domain while focussing on the person in your private domain ie at your door ringing your doorbell. I don't think Ring doorbells can do that?

 

[Tickle]

You don't get to record the data of other citizens in a public space just because you feel like it.

Not the topic of the conversation, I thought I made that clear already:

To be absolutely abundantly clear, we are not talking about recording the general public willy-nilly or creeping on the woman who jogs past your house everyday. We are discussing the incidental recording of passers-by who may be in frame in a situation where a video camera has been primarily to protect the security of your home.

Incidental recording of passers-by is covered in the document I linked. It specifically mentions that if you cannot avoid doing this then you need to abide by the CCTV regulations...

Nothing in that article contravenes anything I have said thus far. Frankly, I don't know what point you are trying to make or why you are still arguing.

 

[Purple]

Pointing the camera so you can see into another person's home is a different matter, as one would have an expectation of privacy in situ.

Using binoculars to look through the neighbours windows is still okay though, right?

 

[Familyman77]

Using binoculars to look through the neighbours windows is still okay though, right?

As long as you have the Net Curtains hiding you

 

[RobFer]

On new estates, there can be so many cameras that basically all of a parallel public road will have coverage.