Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy

Legal Issues for Outside Webcams and Others Privacy? 57

Posted by Cliff from the nitpick-or-a-valid-concern dept.
Jesse Ferrell asks: "My neighbors are asking for me to remove my (weather) web cams from my website because they show part of their houses. Is there any legal precedent to a case like this? I can point the cameras upwards towards the sky more (they are weather cams of course) but it will take time and equipment, possibly modifications to my house. Have you ever heard of a similar situation? What should I do? I'll check the local ordinances and see what I come up with."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Legal Issues for Outside Webcams and Others Privacy? More

Legal Issues for Outside Webcams and Others Privacy?

Comments Filter:

  • There is no problem (Score:2, Interesting)

    by mfos.org ( 471768 )
    Since you are just capturing the exterior of their homes, which is in the public domain, there shouldn't be a problem. YOu're only concern should be is that if the cameras are placed in such a way as to reveal something that normaly would be hidden.

    • Re:There is no problem (Score:5, Informative)

      by tenman ( 247215 ) <`moc.iausten' `ta' `gro.todhsals'> on Sunday June 09, 2002 @03:34PM (#3669421) Journal
      Agree, but this isn't the only thing to look at. The people next door have a "reasonable expectation of privacy". Also, As seen in recent Texas law findings, any "image capture device" attached to a structure (even inside you own home) needs to have a strong legal backing. Juries all over the US are convicting people for using a camera voyeuristically. It would not be that hard for the neighbor claim the camera was being used to capture them for "sexual purposes". In Texas all they would have to do, is
      1) Identify the area that is exposed to the camera.
      2) Walk into view of the camera.
      3) Expose undergarments (make it look unintentional, yet non-random)
      4) The other person in the house captures the image from the web site.
      5) Call a lawyer.

      None of this is fun and games. If the law upholds his right to have the camera, then who is to say that government "weather" cameras can't be trained in on someone's house, "coincidentally".

      I am in favor of the right to point and shoot any thing I want, but let's think of the ramifications that a judgment in this area might have.
    • Actually your biggest concern should be how your neighbors feel about this, whether or not you can persuade them that your camera is harmless (assuming it is not showing the interior of their home), and how the courts in your area would rule should they choose to file a lawsuit (assuming you want to let a webcam start a fued of such proportions).

      Now, you could take the advice of many below and fashion cardboard cutouts to block the view of the nieghbor's house (this would probably be simple and seems likely to appease the neighbors). You could tell your neighbor to take a flying leap (I recommend consulting a lawyer in your area first, though... if your webcam is illegal in your area-- and different cities/states may well have different laws-- you could be liable for damages and court costs if you lose your case). You could move the cameras so they don't show the neighbor's house at all. You could get a different hobby altogether.

      My own personal opinion as a citizen is that if I don't want someone to see inside my house I pull the shades. I have no right to prevent them from viewing or photographing the outside of the house unless they can be shown to be violating a copyright in doing so.

      If I have a webcam that shows me my yard (which I have done so that I could monitor it while I am at work-- damn kids wreck my gardens, it would be nice to catch one in the act), but also happens to show me the house across the street or the one next door then tough bounce-- I'm not going to subvert my own right to monitor my property because someone else thinks they have some sort of privacy rights. Of course, I do consider it a form of harrassment (and would not condone) to be setting up a camera in such a way that it can see parts of my neighbors property that I could not normally see (i.e. putting a camera up on a pole to see over a privacy fence--- which would be very different from having an obvious 2nd story window out of which I could easily see over the fence).

  • Why bring up legal? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Unknown Poltroon ( 31628 ) <unknown_poltroon1sp@myahoo.com> on Sunday June 09, 2002 @02:01PM (#3669116)
    Your neighbors asked you to point them somewhere else. They havent taken you to court, they havent threatened to sue. Why wouldn't you? So it will take a little effort on your part. So what. Do you dislike your neighbors that much? We spend so much time on slashdot bitching about stupid laws, but its stuff like this that gets the stupid laws put into place. People arent willing to make what seems like a reasonable concesssion, so next year therel be local law that says you ant leave an unattened camera filming someone elses property that will take years to get rid of, if we can.
    • That being said, unless he is selling the images: you have no legal "expectation of privacy" for the outside of your house. It's there for all to see. They don't have a leg to stand on (unless you can see *inside* their house with the camera, which is a different matter).

      • But why be a bastard about it. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by gaudior ( 113467 ) <{marktjohns} {at} {gmail.com}> on Sunday June 09, 2002 @04:58PM (#3669720) Homepage
        They asked. It's no big deal. If my hobby infringes on my neighbors sensitivities, then I should modify my behaviour, as a good neighbor.

        They aren't asking anything unreasonable.

      • I haven't read all the articles in this thread, but a large question is how much of the neighbors house is showing up in the pics. If your camera is capable of seeing people coming and going from their front door, it's a lot more of an issue than if you have a small portion of their roof line.

        If your cameras are fixed position, considering using software to black out the portion they find offensive, and see if that flies with them.

        While I agree it's best to get along with the neighbors, I doubt there are any laws that explicitly state that it's illegal to photograph anything you can see from your window. Well, unless you happen to be near Area 51.

        --jcwren

  • It's legal unless there is a local ordinance (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zenyu ( 248067 ) on Sunday June 09, 2002 @02:07PM (#3669130)

    But he might just be asking for a curtesy, maybe he likes walking around naked in his apartment and doesn't want his co-workers looking at the web page obsesively trying to get a good look. Maybe just positioning it differently will appease him. If you live in a co-op with him he might be able to get you to take it down entirely by appealing to the board. Besides curtesy is underrated, if you can make him happy without ruining the camera view why not?

    There might also be a technological solution, blur the portions of the images that show windows before sending them out as a web cam.

  • Panasonic Unitized Cameras (Score:4, Insightful)

    by renehollan ( 138013 ) <[rhollan] [at] [clearwire.net]> on Sunday June 09, 2002 @02:08PM (#3669132) Homepage Journal
    IIRC, Panasonic makes unitized pan-tilt-zoom video cameras that allow for blocking out selected parts of an image, like windows of other buildings (and given the degree of zoom available, this is a good thing).

    While such cameras are expensive (approx. US$1500), and provide aanalog RS-170 video which would have to be digitized, and not exactly "web" cams, if you point your cam at a fixed point, perhaps you could use software to blur out any of your neighbors' windows or other "sensitive" areas.

    I'd talk to a lawyer, find out what you can do (probably a lot, unless you're shooting into their windows, or fenced-in yard), and then suggest reasonable blurring of possibly sensitive portions. IOW, offer to go above and beyond what you have to do, as a gesture of goodwill, and it this isn't good enough, send them a lawyers' letter to stop the harassment.

    • "While such cameras are expensive (approx. US$1500),.......... software to blur out any of your neighbors' windows or other "sensitive" areas. "

      Cardboard cutout to block the neighbors house. 5 cents.
  • Well, it would help if you told us where you live.

    But really, if you're in the US, it's very unlikely that your neighbors have any legal ground to support their request. In fact, it's legal in most places to videotape people nude in the shower if you can see them from your property. I don't know if you can have friends over for beer and pretzels to watch those tapes, but I assume so. IANAL.

    On the other hand, how important is it to you to keep good relations with your neighbors, and is it worth a whole lot of intra-neigbor unpleasantness to keep the houses in the frame?

    You could always use webcam software which overlays a transparent graphic over their houses, if the views never change. There's plenty of it available. Google search: webcam software overlay graphics [google.com]

  • As a courtesy ... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by zangdesign ( 462534 ) on Sunday June 09, 2002 @02:29PM (#3669196) Journal
    to your neighbors, I would make the atttempt to repoint the cameras. As a previous poster pointed out, they haven't taken you to court, so presumably there is no animosity yet.

    Potential solutions:

    1) mount the camera on the roof. This should get you better clearance.

    2) Cut a silhouette and place in front of the camera. That way you can make people think you live somewhere more exciting (that was NOT intended as a cheap shot at your town).

    3) Mount the cameras at your local school. Give the kids something to ooh and aah about, do something good for your community, appease your neighbors, and get that warm fuzzy feeling all in one.

    Have a better one.
    • 1) mount the camera on the roof. This should get you better clearance.

      And expose the sensitive electronics to the wind and dirt and so on, even more than they are now.

      2) Cut a silhouette and place in front of the camera.

      And defeat the whole purpose of having the camera in place.

      3) Mount the cameras at your local school.

      And have to deal with the local school board's bureaucracy and policies and petty whatevers, not to mention lose control of your own project.

      None of the options seem particularly appealing, somehow...
    • As the child of parents who keep a very noisey dog in the neighborhood, it is not cool to hear about how the dog upsets people so much. Heck, she drives me nuts! So be nice if you can!

  • It depends on where they're pointing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by drbhoneydew ( 211966 ) on Sunday June 09, 2002 @02:49PM (#3669269)

    A lot of their perceived problem probably arises from what they think you're going to be able to see.

    I don't think I'd be too impressed with a webcam that offers a perfect view into my bedroom, for example.

    Probably the best way of resolving this is to show them what the view that the camera gets is. They can then tell you which bits they're not happy about and you can potentially come to a mutually agreeable solution.

    Having had a look at the site, I'm guessing that it's cam #2 [weathermatrix.net] that's causing the issue. All it really needs is to be tilted up by a couple of degrees more to get those windows on the bottom left out of the picture.

    In cases such as this it is always better to try to talk about it rationally before getting all litigious. From a legal standpoint, you'll probably end up being forced to tilt the camera up a couple of degrees. The difference will be that it'll be after a drawn out process which will alienate you from your neighbours and the only people profitting will be the lawyers.

    Here in the UK, we have rights under the Data Protection Act to a copy of any video footage involving us (eg CCTV) and for our faces to be obscured if the footage is distributed without our permission. This usually only applies to footage that is stored on tape etc so webcams would be a bit of a grey area anyway (although the courts would probably say that the neighbours have the right to their privacy).

    • Having had a look at the site, I'm guessing that it's cam #2 [weathermatrix.net] that's causing the issue. All it really needs is to be tilted up by a couple of degrees more to get those windows on the bottom left out of the picture.

      If that was my house it would bother me. It might be illegal and it might not -- that shouldn't matter to you nearly as much as offending your neighbor. The biggest cause for alarm on their part is that the windows are visible. Perhaps you can't see in them, but at a minimum you could monitor the lighting and try to infer when they are and aren't home.

      Regardless of the law, be a good neighbor and respond to their request. You don't have to take the webcam down, just make sure their house isn't in the picture. You can do this one of two ways: tilt the camera or block the line of sight to their house with a blinder.

      You should also go talk to them in person and explain that your only interest in webcams is as weathercams, that you showed their house only incidentally and meant no offense, and that you respect their request and will comply.
      • One issue that people seem not to have considered is the ability of third parties to use the webcam data for purposes not intended by the webcam owner. Such as, seeing when the occupants of the house go to bed for the purpose of stalking or harassing them, or looking for sudden changes in those habits to tell if they've gone on vacation (and that it's safe to rob the house).

        C'mon, we're geeks here. We should all be aware of the untoward possibilities of "feature creep".

  • is chivalry dead? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by digitalmuse ( 147154 )
    I would have to suggest that you prove yourself as a mature and rational member of your physical community and move/adjust the camera in a way to appease your neighboors. I would show them that you respect people's personal boundries, and perhaps gain a measure of dignity for the larger community of sky-watchers/geeks/whatevers in that person's eyes.
    Don't resort to hiding behind the word of law. Be proactive and keep the peace. you might get a little more respect from them in the future when something gets under your skin.
  • Tell us the URL so we can judge for ourselves if you are invading your neighbour's privacy. And if we deem that you are guilty we will issue a 24 hour, round the clock /.ing penalty.

  • Your neighbors probably have no legal grounds for such a request, as one can hardly be considered to have privacy in one's yard, which is in the view of numerous neighbors.

    However, if they have built a wall around their yard for privacy, and your camera is such that it can see over their wall, they might have better legal grounds.

    However, despite the legal grounds, you may want to keep on good terms with your neighbors. Since your camera is in fixed position, a certain part of what it videorecords will always be yard, another (higher) part will be sky. Simply black out the yard part with some software. I don't know of what software may do this, but its a relatively simple thing -- you just black out say the lower fourth of what your webcam records, which is ground anyways and not sky.

  • Webcam viewing others' property (Score:3, Insightful)

    by markwelch ( 553433 ) <markwelch@markwelch.com> on Sunday June 09, 2002 @03:40PM (#3669444) Homepage Journal
    It probably is illegal (or ought to be) to have a webcam positioned so that the general public can get a view of someone's private property (even the back yard) that is not otherwise available to the general public. Just because I can view my neighbor in the shower if I peek from my attic window, doesn't mean it's reasonable (or legal) to broadcast that image to the world.

    The core issue here, regarding the weather webcam, is what is the right thing to do, and I don't really see any doubt: the original post mentions that it is possible, though inconvenient, to reposition the cameras, and actually implies that repositioning the cameras would provide a better picture of the weather. Just do it.

    There is another issue with webcams that I think needs to be pointed out: consider that the weirdest people may view your webcam. For example, if you have a webcam that shows the traffic on your street, and the picture includes the sidewalk, a pedophile could use the webcam to profile when the local schoolkids walk to school, and to get a nice look to decide which one to abduct. Yes, it's extremely unlikely, but how would you feel the next day if that happened?

    Also, someone wrote:
    >> In fact, it's legal in most places to videotape people nude in the shower if you can see them from your property.<<

    I didn't see the usual "IANAL" disclaimer, but let me be clear on this: I am a lawyer, and I am quite certain that it WOULD be illegal (in California, at least, and probably in nearly ever U.S. state) to set up a webcam that peers into the neighbor's shower, even through an open window (note my shift from "videotape" to "webcam"). You might be legally able to videotape the neighbor in his shower, for example, to create evidence that your neighbor is indecently exposing himself to your family (one would assume that you'd not need to do this just to support of your request to the neighbor that he install a curtain or blinds). But you could not legally videotape your neighbor in the shower and show it to others for entertainment.

  • You are wrangling with something that ought to be discussed with legal counsel. It may be in your best interest to re-aim the camera, and/or use the computer to blur/black/remove/annotate portions of the picture that your neighbors object to. (ie, black out the house and put in small print: "Smelly people" or some such nonsense. Not wise, nor kind, but funny all the same.)

    That being said - video recording laws are being changed, but in most states, right now, you can record pretty much anything to video (NOT AUDIO) in any place, public or private with few exceptions.

    If want to stand your ground, you might at least try to be courteous and safe. Point out that your camera doesn't see into private yards, and through windows. Point out that everything you can see on camera can be seen by a person from a similar vantage point, and that they have no reasonable expectation of privacy from a person, camera, or any viewing device similarily mounted.

    Once you've done that, change the view anyway and very subtly imply that any view that includes them is ruined, or you've seen all of them that you care to see. Or you could be really mean and publish as much info about them on your page as is legally allowed, maybe some extra pictures, notes about their appearance and behavior. That'll get them really riled up.

    You might want to think about the flip side, though. Right now some thief could be watching their coming/going and making a schedule of when they are home, when they aren't, how they typically secure their home, etc. It could be some pedophile sitting in front of their computer waiting to see when their kid is home.

    You ought to ask yourself, do you value your privacy in public places? Do you like the idea of video cameras everywhere? Perhaps these neighbors are avid readers of Slashdot and they love the YRO section. They may simply be expressing their desire for more public privacy.

    -Adam
  • Since the cameras are stationary you could just take photoshop/Gimp and create a black mask of the houses and then just us that to create a silluet( SP?). Then just overlay that on the captured image before you put it on the site.

  • Cheap Solution: Image Pre-Processing (Score:3, Insightful)

    by scotpurl ( 28825 ) on Sunday June 09, 2002 @04:07PM (#3669576)
    If the camera in question always looks the same direction (no pan & tilt), then you just need to batch process the images before publishing them.

    Either mask out the scenery in the foreground, or blur it beyond recognition.

    The merge between your background image (the "live" picture) and a foreground image would probably be easiest. That or do a poly-fill on known coordinates from a command line. GNUplot could almost do that.

    But, in the interest of being a good neighbor, unplug, or stop publishing the camera pix, until you have a permanent solution.

    Don't piss your neighbors off. If your house catches fire or is burgled while you're away, they may pull up deck chairs and watch, rather than telephoning for help.
  • I am proud of the many slashdotters whose advice was to be nice and try to accomodate the neighbor. I assumed that most people would say "Tell 'em to ^$%* off." Thanks for restoring a bit of my faith in human nature.

  • This is foolish! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by terpia ( 28218 )
    What the hell do you mean that it will take equipment and modifications? It's a damn camera! Aim that little son of a bitch UP! Don't be a bastard. If you had that camera pointed at my house and I asked you to move it, you would move it. Or I would break it, and turn into one of those neighbors that makes the neighborhood a much less freindly place. Have some consideration.


    Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. It's time to grow up and behave like a civilised human living in close proximity to other civilised humans.

    • What the hell do you mean that it will take equipment and modifications? It's a damn camera! Aim that little son of a bitch UP!

      I thought the same thing. I don't know specifically what he's talking about, but without more detail, I wouldn't be surprised if the next Ask Slashdot from this guy was "I can't change channels on my TV because I'd have to get up off the sofa to reach the remote - what should I do?"

      • I'd recommend that you build a voice activated robot to grab the remote and bring it to you. You should also program it to manually change channels when the batteries die in the remote. The discussion will probably wander and every crazy idea under the sun will come up.

        How about....
        plug a tv tuner into your bewoulf cluster and use that instead
        watch tv from your computer and ssh/ssl into it but not telnet unless you are using kerberos and vlans on your switch behind an OpenBSD/Linux/toaster firewall.
        blah, blah, blah, etc...............

        It will get even lower mentioning aliens, grits and all things petrified. Moderators will down these posts so fast it will seem like they are being sucked into a karma blackhole.

        Of course you can just get up and get it yourself but that isn't geeky enough. Please try to be geekier for the sake of being geekier.
  • It is a fucking weather camera. Stick your head out the fucking window if you want the weather.

    They have the legal advantage. You legally cannot take someones picture and publish without consent. You know do not have consent. If I were you I would stop whinning and remove the camera.

    Oh and god forbid don't point it in your shower. We don't need another one of those. Especially a nerd one!
    • >You legally cannot take someones picture
      >and publish without consent.

      You can if it is "news", or incidental to "news"
      (there are a bunch of other exceptions as well)
      Weather is probably "news"
      You are probably OK legally, but I'd try a technical fix so as to avoid a lifetime of bad feelings.
  • Can't we all just get along?
  • A few links, minimal comment; This [kithrup.com] was mentioned (iirc) on /. earlier, and I keep referring back to it. I really don't understand the difference between a person seeing and hearing something in public versus a camera observing the same thing. And I wonder what your neighbors would think of my my perv-cam hack [themall.co.nz]
    • I really don't understand the difference between a person seeing and hearing something in public versus a camera observing the same thing.

      And I can't understand how people can't understand the difference. :-)

      First, there's permenance to photographic images (digital or analogue, still or moving) that's not there in a person's memory. Second, a photograph can be copied, or shown to others, while a memory can't. Third, a camera can be easily set to watch you 24/7, while personal surveillance takes a lot of time and effort. Fourth, a camera can be concealed much more easily than a human watcher.

      As far as Brin's idea of a "transparent society", it rests on the fundamental misapprehension that the masses will keep authorities from abusing the right of minorities (racial, cultural, or ideological). But the masses are often the ones calling for a crackdown on those outsiders". You can't rely on the majority to protect the right of the minority; you have to set up rules ahead of time.

  • Why not just build an overlay that will mask out their house with something else asn ask them if that would suffice. My guess you are asking /. because you really want to keep your cam pointing in that direction

    -- Tim
  • What I would do is simply ask that they take a look at those cameras views. To me I cannot see what the big deal is, The detail level in the camera views, you cannot even see a small poodle dog if it was hung from the window by his collar. You should ask them if they intend upon dancing naked on their rooftops.

    If they really have a problem with the cameras, get a smoked dome or even better a mirror (blind the bastards that try to see where the camera is pointed) or point out the fact that you are not being incedulous by using a smoked or mirror dome to disguise the fact the camera is pointed skyward and not pointed through their bathroom window at the mirror which catches the reflection of a large picture of great aunt martha which also reflects a few of the neighbor's little johnny wacking off on the toilet.

    Your neighbors have watched too much CSI or The agency and saw too many times where "MOVIE PHOTOSHOP" was capable of pulling a relfection of a face out of the reflection of a black wall off a pair of sunglasses. It simply isnt done with color cameras, the resolution is just way too low. Hell you couldnt even get your camera to totally fill up my 600x480 laptop screen much less blow away the res my friend's photoshop studio screens. You can possibly do it with very ultra hi-res black and white models like what is used on the sattlites of your favorite goverments at http://terraserver.microsoft.com/

    I suggest you find a view of their home at terraserver and tell them to attack the goverment first, as they show their whole roof, and all of their yard.

    DRACO-

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein

Close