Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 532 posts

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#411

Post by atkailash »

dekhn wrote: post #107
unfocused wrote: post #31

My next door neighbor (we share a wall) had their bicycles stolen twice, so they installed Ring (floodlight) cameras in both the backyard and the front porch. After a year, the cameras have yielded no added security, or caught any "bad guys" as far as I can tell and from what they told me. What I realized, is they use it to keep track of their kids, funny cat videos that trigger the recording, and most importantly, a…

The camera may be acting as a deterrent (if they didn't have any additional thefts) without it being obvious. I never would give a neighbor a hard time about a camera pointing at a publicly visible spot on my property- just into windows and other semi-private locations. That includes both audio and video. I ascribe to the "it's legal for journalists to go through your trash, so if you want privacy, shred your trash f…

No post body was provided.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#412

Post by npteljes »

Pakdef wrote: post #252
salawat wrote: post #3

If the data is not on your hardware, it is not your data.

Are you saying that the movie studios don't own their movies?

They own it legally, and they are absolutely unsuccessful in stopping unauthorized copies. Same with the Ring videos, no? The owner of camera owns the recordings, maybe, but they can't really control disclosure.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#413

Post by StanislavPetrov »

MacsHeadroom wrote: post #347
alanh wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My front door is not a 'public area', not really

You don't have a legal expectation of privacy anywhere visible from public property, including even the inside of your house viewable from a public easement/street. Because of this, it's legal for someone to point a camera right inside your window or front door. It's also illegal (public indecency) for you to be naked in your own window or open door.

If I set up a telescope to look inside your window most people would call that an invasion of privacy, even if the telescope was set up on public property. Having a high resolution digital camera where images can be zoomed and a very sensitive microphone that can pick up conversations is similar, in my opinion.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#415

Post by encryptluks2 »

nedwin wrote: post #335
encryptluks2 wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shitty behavior how? There is nothing illegal about recordings your neighbors driveway.

There's a difference between illegal and shitty. Shitty = you ask your neighbour not to point their cameras at your house, and they ignore you. Seems unnecessary.

And so you may have a different opinion of your neighbor. They share a different opinion. Some Karen's think it is shitty for you to park in front of their house on a public street.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#416

Post by jdgoesmarching »

dionidium wrote: post #181
karaterobot wrote: post #8

> “If there is the infrastructure, if there is the channel by which police can request footage without a warrant or consent of the user, under what circumstances they get it is out of our control. I worry that because it’s decided by the police and by somebody at Ring, there will be temptation to use that for increasingly less urgent situations.” Many people (I would argue anybody with common sense) predicted Ring wo…

My view on this is that we're not going back and it would be silly to try to do so. Once you have the technology to record, track, and ultimately apprehend criminals, simply not doing so in the name of ideological purity becomes increasingly obscene. What we need are courts that understand the technology, prosecutors who fear censure for overreach, and fair laws about standards of access to the data. It's here to sta…

Did you just wave away all concerns and criticisms of an increasingly aggressive surveillance and police state as “ideological purity?”

People use that word because they think their own biases are realistic, but it doesn’t get more ideological than believing that giving police and courts more surveillance power has benefits that are “too compelling.”

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#417

Post by user00012-ab »

unfocused wrote: post #31

My next door neighbor (we share a wall) had their bicycles stolen twice, so they installed Ring (floodlight) cameras in both the backyard and the front porch. After a year, the cameras have yielded no added security, or caught any "bad guys" as far as I can tell and from what they told me. What I realized, is they use it to keep track of their kids, funny cat videos that trigger the recording, and most importantly, a…

You could mount a small laser pointer in your window pointing directly into their camera.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#418

Post by bombcar »

adastra22 wrote: post #118
giraffe_lady wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah my personal view is that these cameras do nothing except widen police surveillance capacity but I'm somewhat interested in what the people who buy them think they are doing.

Personally, I was motivated to get a Ring camera after a couple instances of porch theft. In the years since it has never happened again. So there is some deterrent value. I would never install a smart device INSIDE my home. But I don’t see why people are freaking out about door/driveway cameras.

The number of people who report this is ... significantly high.

Perhaps Amazon was instructing their drivers to steal packages until they see a Ring installed.

(Even with a Ring camera you should still get recordings of people noticing you have it ...)

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#419

Post by NaturalPhallacy »

unfocused wrote: post #31

My next door neighbor (we share a wall) had their bicycles stolen twice, so they installed Ring (floodlight) cameras in both the backyard and the front porch. After a year, the cameras have yielded no added security, or caught any "bad guys" as far as I can tell and from what they told me. What I realized, is they use it to keep track of their kids, funny cat videos that trigger the recording, and most importantly, a…

I see where you're coming from, but in the US at least there is no legal right to privacy outside/in public. That Amazon can and will turn over recordings - possibly without even a warrant - is horrifying. But that's basically the reality in the UK with CCTV.

Should something be done about it? Sure. But that's where we are.

Re: Amazon admits giving police Ring camera footage without consent

#420

Post by ClumsyPilot »

jrh206 wrote: post #87
techdragon wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For bonus points they can then point the finger at the local thieves that happily try to identify and then shadow Amazon delivery contractors and steal valuable looking parcels based on whatever gut instinct they have for value based on size/shape/weight of the packages. Amazon proves the delivery and now it’s the local Polive Department’s problem. They are literally selling customers an excuse they can use later aga…

In your example the thieves have nothing to do with Amazon or their drivers. I don’t understand how this could be construed as Amazon selling an excuse for something they’re not responsible for.

I once had delivery guy give my package to random kids that were loitering outside my door.

The way I see it, untill i have recieved it, it's the seller's responsebility

Post reply on HN