CCTV of the recent road accident near the Natural History Museum
"Andy Burns" wrote in message
Bill Wright wrote:
anyone with CCTV could make a bit by selling to a
broadcaster or a newspaper website.
Only if that was one of the specified purposes of the CCTV in accordance
with the DPA
Is fixed CCTV subject to different rules to someone in the street filming
with their phone, or is man-in-the-street footage really subject to DPA
restrictions but no-one normally bothers? Is Google Streetview's blurring of
faces and number plates actually a legal requirement or is it a courtesy to
appease people concerned about privacy and maybe a worst-case rule in case
other countries have more stringent rules.
Is it no longer the case that you can film anything that happens in a public
place (the street) but not on private land such as a garden, and that people
do not have any right to privacy in public. I always thought that warnings
about CCTV were there to make it legal to use the footage in court, not to
make it legal to publish it in general. Or are our laws becoming as
draconian as USSR's and various dictatorships'? Obviously "public place"
excludes specific MOD sites. I know some countries do not allow dashcams to
be used, so you have no way of presenting footage to insurance companies in
the event of an accident and you have to rely entirely on third-party
witnesses - if any - rather than photographic evidence.