3 ms·
Nice. They can't get away with spending taxpayer money on cameras everywhere that will provide them the ability to watch everyone and everything. But it's ok
by Accujack 6y ago
Nice.
They can't get away with spending taxpayer money on cameras everywhere that will provide them the ability to watch everyone and everything.
But it's ok if it's just a friendly company sharing its customers' video feeds.
Despite the fact that the US has no laws governing camera surveillance and what the data can be used for, who it can be shared with or sold to, and there exists no right to be forgotten or even informed you've been recorded this way.
- someonehere 6y agoI could be wrong but I’m certain in California you can only film people on public property. You can’t film public to private if I remember correctly. Mississippi may have different filming/photographing laws on the books. I almost feel like this wouldn’t be allowed in California.
- lakeWater 6y agoThis allows Ring owners to opt-in to allowing a live feed to police. I’m pretty sure that works around that sort of issue.
- zenexer 6y agoI would think it wouldn’t work if other people’s private property is in view, though, no? In a typical suburban area, it would be difficult to position a camera in such a way that it’s not also recording your neighbor’s property.