We're on the same side, but I think you're giving the argument too much credit, it's like calling a sphere a circle. You're probably going to have to take a har

We're on the same side, but I think you're giving the argument too much credit, it's like calling a sphere a circle. You're probably going to have to take a harder stance to convince people. You and I both know that a camera is different to ubiquitous cameras, and that when and where those cameras are directed and recording are important. Most important of all given those first two distinctions, is who controls and owns the footage. The implications of the footage ending up on a computer not belonging to the recorder and recorded are profound. How will the law react? Mandatory recording for the typically sensitive professions? Will that then extend out in all directions? Will Joe Public be charged with destroying evidence: e.g. shop owners being sued for compensation, who destroy their CCTV footage to cover up?