Security camera question

Anyone can take pictures of anyone in a public place at any time.

If CCTV is not being used by a business you don't need warning signs and you can still use it as evidence.

Don't forsee any problems on private land. Overlooking someone else's house or land could lead to complaints.

I'm sorry to hear about this: it's a peculiarly disgusting and distressing thing to happen and needs to be stopped at once. I'd agree with Dennis and Rusty that - unless the horses or the land are part of your business - you have a perfect right to monitor them without announcing the fact. A business would come under the scope of the DPA with restrictions, signs etc.

Personally, I'd hie me off to uk.legal.moderated and ask in there. They might advise whether or not you ought to involve the police immediately and on the kind of evidence you might collect that would be admissible, should you choose to do so.

I hope this helps. I hope the problem stops and I hope you'll keep us informed.

Nick

The relevant legislation is the Data Protection Act, which covers a lot more than just CCTV. However, a Court has ruled that the Data Protection Act does not to apply to fixed cameras that cannot track or zoom in on a particular individual and that are used exclusively for crime prevention purposes.

Colin Bignell

In my considerable experience the police are very pleased when given good conclusive CCTV evidence and tend to overlook minor issues relating to the camera. You do need a recorder that date and time stamps each frame.

Bill

Is a swimming pool a public place?

Well if its private land I'd have thought you could do as you please. Brian

Most are not, as you have to pay a fee to get in. Some shopping centres are not public places either.

I think that "in" should be "from", Hence the paperatzi with 1000mmm lenes taking pictures of people on private land from public land. Unless there are notices prohibiting the taking of photos under some act of parliment, a section of the Official Secrets Act?

But if you can see in from a public place... They could pull you in for other offences rather than the simple taking of photos, that would be used to support the other charges though.

Reminds me of a "shock, horror" story that the Today programmme carried when the first resonable resolution satellite imagary came publically online. Great fuss that anyone (terrorist) could get the layout etc of the various military bases and research establishments etc. Man from MOD simply said "if you have something to hide, hide it".

I'd say most shopping centers are not public places, niether are their car parks. They are places to which the public has access but they are still private land.

I suspect the definition of "public place" varies from law to law. The law relating to cars makes places like shopping centre/supermarket car parks "public places" - IOW "places to which the public has access" irrespective of the ownership.

So I'd be ok photographing other people's kids in the local park then? Might get lynched of course, but technically in the clear? Is a library a public place because there is no fee?

These new bridge cameras are interesting. x42 zoom allows you to snap anything without the subject, or anyone else, being aware of that.

So why did you have a fit and say that the CCTV footage of Mary Bale dumping a cat into a wheelie bin was illegal in your earlier posts?

They did not seem very pleased when I caught them on my CCTV doing something illegal.

He'll claim it makes a difference that it was taken from private property viewing a public place, or that pictures are different from videos, or wheelie bins are prohibited places, or ...

the wheelie bin was speeding.

You should see the rules and regs the Beavers and Cubs have about taking photos.

That's when I knew the world had gone mad.

Every parent has to fill in a consent form before group photos are taken.

Do what ever you need to do to catch the bastards.

Remember to hide the camera when you do catch them if you do not want a prosecution.

I will claim the same thing I did before. Its use was illegal, you can't just go around publishing videos. Its defamation.

Unless youve edited the video it is simply reporting a fact. That is not deformation.