undefined

points

[-]

It seems very easy. Always on spy camera installed for the express purpose of dragnet surveillance? Illegal. Film child’s baseball game? Legal.

I find this attitude I find kind of tiring. Gosh it’s just sooo hard to figure out the difference between Flock Safety and Big Bill’s Little League Sports Photography. It’s actually very straightforward to determine the difference between these two things. So easy, an idiot could do it. Or a judge.

by LeonKnst1 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

While I do agree it's tiring and agree with your point I think the issue is finding the exact point to draw the line. It's easy to differentiate the two ends.

by MrDrMcCoy4 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

I think the operative difference here is that in the case of the little league photography, the cameras are not fixed in place, are temporary, and are not set up with the intent to capture the identity and actions of everyone in the background. Fixed-installation cameras are permanent, do attempt to capture all possible subjects in its frame, and have an alternate, obvious intent to identify them all. I don't think a Private investigator, paparazzi, or parked police cruiser on a stakeout represent anywhere near the same practical or legal problems as fixed, always-on surveillance cameras. As such, this seems to me like a good place to draw the line.

by AngryData25 minutes ago|

prev|

[-]

By this logic I could track you 24/7 with a squadron of drones flying 4 feet above you watching your every movement including through all your windows.

by TehCorwiz2 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Haven't stalking and surveillance always had a different interpretation despite mostly taking place in public?

by simoncion2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> Haven't stalking and surveillance always had a different interpretation despite mostly taking place in public?

Yep. And dragnet surveillance has (pretty much?) always been illegal in the US... but it takes the courts an awfully long time to notice the new dragnets the cops set up.

For example, despite the fact that the third-party doctrine says that cops can just walk up and get any ordinary business records someone you do business with has created about you, courts continue to notice and declare illegal new ways in which naive application of that doctrine creates dragnets.