4 ms·
It says users can review footage before sharing, so I could see situations where users reviewed footage and had no problem sharing the result. Doesn't seem like
by Goronmon 7y ago
It says users can review footage before sharing, so I could see situations where users reviewed footage and had no problem sharing the result. Doesn't seem like a big deal as long as its voluntary.
- jermaustin1 7y agoI don't know how I feel about this. If someone who lives across the street from a Ring door bell, hasn't given permission to be filmed by Ring/their neighbor/etc, shouldn't they have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" on their own property?
- flyingfences 7y agoNo. You cannot reasonably expect privacy in plain view of a public roadway.
- netsharc 7y agoHuh. Not OP, but if the view is constant, I would be very pissed off. If I walk naked out my front door right now, chances are low anyone will see me (quiet neighborhood, it's past midnight), but if OP does it, boom, there s/he is on camera. And the camera owner can extrapolate when OP/their family members are home or not, when people visit, etc, etc. Could that not be considered surveillance?
- homonculus1 7y agoThe law has not defined it as such. In reality, we absolutely expect our neighbors not to film our front doors 24/7 and give police access to the feed. The law is outdated and ought to be updated to protect against new abuses.
- flyingfences 7y agoNeither reality nor morality is defined by the law. Observation of public space is not "abuse" in any way.
- homonculus1 7y agoClearly some forms of observation are abuse, while others aren't. If I repeatedly hide inside the bushes right outside your land and look into your house, I'm merely observing. I'm still a stalker. If I set up a camera to do the same, why is that better? People are constantly recording their neighbors' comings and goings, their visitors and associations, and sending that data to a bureaucratic megacorp that actively cozies up to law enforcement. "Observation of public space" is reductive, that's a cyberpunk nightmare. It's poisonous to free society.
- kaikai 7y agoUnfortunately (?) there is no reasonable expectation of privacy for activities visible from public areas. That reasoning is used for everything from license plate scanners to upskirt videos.
- JohnFen 7y agoThis is actually my major objection to Ring. I'm glad that Ring surveillance gear has a unique light on it, so I know what neighborhoods to avoid. I'd want to avoid those neighborhoods partly to avoid being surveilled, and partly because if a neighborhood has more than the occasional Ring installed, that seems like a major indicator that the neighborhood has a high crime problem.
- reaperducer 7y agoas long as its voluntary Until it isn't. All it takes is one person holding out in a neighborhood with a child kidnapping for enough hysteria to build for this to become legislated as mandatory.
- Spooky23 7y agoRead the EULA. It's subject to change without notice, and your continued use is implied acceptance.
- AlexandrB 7y agoThe Snowden revelations were 6 years ago and since then there there has been no meaningful reigning in of federal surveillance power or of public/private surveillance "partnerships". The world in which Amazon/Ring would respect your wishes regarding the footage is not the one we live in.