“Experts in Europe warn that these devices are used to record strangers without their consent, possibly breaching EU law.”
“A small LED light is designed to indicate when recording is taking place, but RTBF’s investigators found that tutorials explaining how to conceal the indicator are abundant and easily accessible online.”
Sometimes I have a hard time deciding who I despise more, parasite Mark Zuckerberg or its witless hosts who keep using its products—yes, Zuck’s pronoun is it. Ban Ray-Ban, for frick’s sake.
You have no expectation of privacy in public places. In fact, if you’re in a public place you should assume you’re being recorded.
This tech has privacy concerns for sure, but this isn’t it.
In Belgium people do have an expectation of privacy in public, what they did is straight up illegal under Belgian law. If they want to film or photograph a person (not as an accidental passerby, but as the subject as was the case here), then they need to get consent from that person. If they want to share that footage online, then they need consent for that as well.
Doesn’t seem that straight forward from the article. It says you “generally” need consent, and that was said in regard to “filming and publishing”. What about just filming? The “generally” makes me think that this isn’t breaking any laws unless they publish it without consent.
The generally refers to the exceptions where no consent is needed. Had the ladies been committing a crime, then no consent was needed to start filming. Had they been filming some landmark and the ladies walked through the frame, again no consent needed from them. But generally speaking, consent is required before you may start filming a stranger.
I disagree. If you have thousands of these and some program live cross-matching and correlating everything about everyone, it is a different problem from “being seen in public” or even traditional street cameras. Before, they could investigate a limited number of people, so they had to focus on suspects and a case. Now they just mass trawl everyone’s lives simultaneously.
Who is “they” here?
The fact is that if you’re in public you have no expectation of privacy………because you’re in public.
Depends. You have image rights. Those may not be relevant to people taking pictures…but they are relevant to databases collecting info on you.
You don’t own “image rights” of yourself.
Depends on the country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights in shithole countries you don’t.
In the US that won’t pass muster, laws aren’t the same everywhere.
Looking at US laws it appears you’re wrong. Unless you’re in a bathroom or somewhere where privacy is expected, recording in public places without permission is completely legal.
My intent was to say that it wouldn’t break US law, "possibly breaching EU law.” wouldn’t work in the is
That’s why I specifically stated law isn’t the same everywhere. the point being that OP is saying it’s fine because it’s in public, but that’s US law, not all public recording is legal the world over.
But you said it won’t pass muster in the US? I’m saying it does. Most of Europe also allows recording in public. Which countries don’t?
And everyone else, but the rest of us don’t matter, I guess?
What are you even trying to say?
No one has an expectation of privacy when they’re out in public. It’s right there in the name - public. The opposite of private.