4 ms·

In what way?

by DKnoll 8y ago

In what way?

colechristensen 8y ago
There was no expectation of being recorded on the job. Car maintenance and repair isn't performance art. The recording was done secretly. If you're an employee whose every action is going to be broadcast to the world, your job gets a whole lot worse. You have to start acting like a public face of the company. The guy making the videos would be a good customer to fire.
- DKnoll 8y ago
  I agree, I would fire the customer. That said I was asking OP what privacy laws he thinks were violated.
  - Steko 8y ago
    As an example if it recorded audio (I'd guess not) then recording a private conversation between two mechanics would presumably fail the one party consent standard in Canada. I'm not sure if video only has the same standard but it may.
    - DKnoll 8y ago
      It's single party consent, the party recording doesn't have to be present. If at least one of the people present at any time are aware of the recording device they grant consent by choosing to work on the vehicle, the same way you grant consent to recording by walking on the premises of a business with overt cameras. Thanks, this is the discussion I was looking to have. I just have an interest in privacy law, I am not advocating what the person in the article did.
      - colechristensen 8y ago
        I don't really think seeing a camera is consent. Or that putting a running camera in a workplace makes you a "party". If I pick up a phone and call a service center, they tell me they are recording the call. Obviously a phone has a microphone, because I am talking into it doesn't mean I consent to being recorded; my default expectation is that I am speaking unrecorded to another human not stored except for the necessities of transmission.
        DKnoll 8y ago
        In Canada any party on a phone call can record without the consent or awareness of other parties. In the case of calling customer service, the agent you end up speaking to is very likely not the one actually doing the recording, but they are aware of it, thus they fulfill the requirements of single party consent. You are correct that placing a camera and not being present while it records does not make you a party, but if you make it clear (verbally, signage, blinking light from a camera on your windshield) that a camera is recording in your vehicle and they choose to work on it they are a consenting party. The law says that you cannot record where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy, but that is meant to apply to places like bathrooms, change rooms, saunas and other similar places.
  - colechristensen 8y ago
    Federal and state wiretapping laws, most likely. Sometimes they are rather ambiguous, and states vary. California is apparently one of the most restrictive two party consent jurisdictions. That is basically that everybody has to consent to a conversation being recorded or the act of recording is illegal. I'm pretty sure this would apply to surveillance cameras inside cars while they are being worked on.
    - DKnoll 8y ago
      This article is about an incident in Toronto, which is subject to Canadian federal and Ontario provincial law.
- perl4ever 8y ago
  From what do you conclude that the recording was done secretly? If it was secret, how did the employee find and turn off the camera and why?
- cronix 8y ago
  Right, the only places you don't really have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" is where you can be seen from public view, or a government building. For instance, it's not illegal for me to take naked pics of someone in their house if 1) I am not trespassing 2) I am on public land (ie street/sidewalk). If their blinds aren't closed, that's on them. A private company is not public. The private company can have cameras on their property recording their employees, though, just like you can install cameras in your private residence and record guests. Do all guests know they're being recorded by your home security system? Most likely not. The correct thing to do in this case though would be for the dealership to call the customer and state that they won't do work on a car with recording equipment running and he needs to come turn it off, or ask permission if they can turn it off. They should, of course, have a written policy to handle this and not do it on the fly.
  - usaphp 8y ago
    > For instance, it's not illegal for me to take naked pics of someone in their house Is it true?
    - cronix 8y ago
      If you include the rest of what I said, yes. You have to be on public property (or your own property - not trespassing on private property) when taking the pic. How would I be invading your privacy if you are standing in front of your unobstructed window naked and I can see you from the street? If I'm on the street, I can take legally pics of anything I can see. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy, unless you close your blinds. Edit, link: https://legalbeagle.com/8608636-laws-being-photographed-permission.html https://legalbeagle.com/8608636-laws-being-photographed-perm...
      - _nalply 8y ago
        A clarification: > Be a little careful however if you are using a telephoto lens. Just because your feet are on public land doesn't mean that you can shoot into private property.
cortesoft 8y ago
To not be recorded while working.
- DKnoll 8y ago
  That's not a right granted by law.
  - cortesoft 8y ago
    Was not talking about legal rights.
    - DKnoll 8y ago
      What other rights are there and how would they be enforced? I think you mean to say it's morally wrong or unethical and I might agree in some circumstances.

In what way?

by DKnoll 8y ago

In what way?

There was no expectation of being recorded on the job. Car maintenance and repair isn't performance art. The recording was done secretly. If you're an employee whose every action is going to be broadcast to the world, your job gets a whole lot worse. You have to start acting like a public face of the company. The guy making the videos would be a good customer to fire.

DKnoll 8y ago
I agree, I would fire the customer. That said I was asking OP what privacy laws he thinks were violated.
- Steko 8y ago
  As an example if it recorded audio (I'd guess not) then recording a private conversation between two mechanics would presumably fail the one party consent standard in Canada. I'm not sure if video only has the same standard but it may.
  - DKnoll 8y ago
    It's single party consent, the party recording doesn't have to be present. If at least one of the people present at any time are aware of the recording device they grant consent by choosing to work on the vehicle, the same way you grant consent to recording by walking on the premises of a business with overt cameras. Thanks, this is the discussion I was looking to have. I just have an interest in privacy law, I am not advocating what the person in the article did.
    - colechristensen 8y ago
      I don't really think seeing a camera is consent. Or that putting a running camera in a workplace makes you a "party". If I pick up a phone and call a service center, they tell me they are recording the call. Obviously a phone has a microphone, because I am talking into it doesn't mean I consent to being recorded; my default expectation is that I am speaking unrecorded to another human not stored except for the necessities of transmission.
      - DKnoll 8y ago
        In Canada any party on a phone call can record without the consent or awareness of other parties. In the case of calling customer service, the agent you end up speaking to is very likely not the one actually doing the recording, but they are aware of it, thus they fulfill the requirements of single party consent. You are correct that placing a camera and not being present while it records does not make you a party, but if you make it clear (verbally, signage, blinking light from a camera on your windshield) that a camera is recording in your vehicle and they choose to work on it they are a consenting party. The law says that you cannot record where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy, but that is meant to apply to places like bathrooms, change rooms, saunas and other similar places.
- colechristensen 8y ago
  Federal and state wiretapping laws, most likely. Sometimes they are rather ambiguous, and states vary. California is apparently one of the most restrictive two party consent jurisdictions. That is basically that everybody has to consent to a conversation being recorded or the act of recording is illegal. I'm pretty sure this would apply to surveillance cameras inside cars while they are being worked on.
  - DKnoll 8y ago
    This article is about an incident in Toronto, which is subject to Canadian federal and Ontario provincial law.
perl4ever 8y ago
From what do you conclude that the recording was done secretly? If it was secret, how did the employee find and turn off the camera and why?
cronix 8y ago
Right, the only places you don't really have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" is where you can be seen from public view, or a government building. For instance, it's not illegal for me to take naked pics of someone in their house if 1) I am not trespassing 2) I am on public land (ie street/sidewalk). If their blinds aren't closed, that's on them. A private company is not public. The private company can have cameras on their property recording their employees, though, just like you can install cameras in your private residence and record guests. Do all guests know they're being recorded by your home security system? Most likely not. The correct thing to do in this case though would be for the dealership to call the customer and state that they won't do work on a car with recording equipment running and he needs to come turn it off, or ask permission if they can turn it off. They should, of course, have a written policy to handle this and not do it on the fly.
- usaphp 8y ago
  > For instance, it's not illegal for me to take naked pics of someone in their house Is it true?
  - cronix 8y ago
    If you include the rest of what I said, yes. You have to be on public property (or your own property - not trespassing on private property) when taking the pic. How would I be invading your privacy if you are standing in front of your unobstructed window naked and I can see you from the street? If I'm on the street, I can take legally pics of anything I can see. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy, unless you close your blinds. Edit, link: https://legalbeagle.com/8608636-laws-being-photographed-permission.html https://legalbeagle.com/8608636-laws-being-photographed-perm...
    - _nalply 8y ago
      A clarification: > Be a little careful however if you are using a telephoto lens. Just because your feet are on public land doesn't mean that you can shoot into private property.

cortesoft 8y ago

To not be recorded while working.

DKnoll 8y ago
That's not a right granted by law.
- cortesoft 8y ago
  Was not talking about legal rights.
  - DKnoll 8y ago
    What other rights are there and how would they be enforced? I think you mean to say it's morally wrong or unethical and I might agree in some circumstances.