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

Judge: Amazon "cannot claim shock" that bathroom spycams were used as advertised

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 173 posts

Re: Judge: Amazon "cannot claim shock" that bathroom spycams were used as advertised

#81

Post by TeMPOraL »

onionisafruit wrote: post #11
Someone1234 wrote: post #6

I love technology, but some things we're able to build today cheaply and using mass-market parts concerns me. Hidden cameras can be so good now that it is impractical for someone to find them. You may disagree with that assertion, but I'd put to you that maybe you just haven't seen some of the top-end products where the only clue is pin-hole sized, or even invisible like hidden behind the LCD screen of a set top box/…

Or maybe you have seen some top-end products without realizing it.

Or, in this case, perhaps some of the top-end products saw you.

Re: Judge: Amazon "cannot claim shock" that bathroom spycams were used as advertised

#82

Post by diputsmonro »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #36
notatoad wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"you can't sell a spy cam that looks like a towel hook" is sort of too broad and too specific to be a good law. what does "looks like a towel hook" actually mean? a law like this would end up having some unintended consequences, where bad actors use it for something like claiming all their competitors products look like towel hooks. i think what's happening here is really the ideal solution: you can sell a camera tha…

I'm not sure I can agree with either of you. I definitely don't agree with "thing I don't like should be illegal". And I can't really agree with "People who sold something I don't like should be liable for it's use". I think the "blame" for objects should lie in the people that misuse them. Now, obviously, it's a little hard to come up with legitimate reasons to have a towel hook camera. However... All you're asking…

I understand where you're coming from, but the effect of rules like that is to essentially create a system where spying on people with towelhook cameras is totally legal and easily doable unless you happen to get caught.

Most laws could be reduced in the same way, but a lot of dangerous illegal activities have proactive protections, like regulations on purchasing and selling guns, etc.

Small cameras as a class are probably too broad not to sell as a rule, but cameras sold with a specifically designed case to pass them off as other objects might be a step too much. Of course one could always drill a small hole into anything and add a camera, but we shouldn't just be giving the offenders the tools so easily right off the shelf.

Re: Judge: Amazon "cannot claim shock" that bathroom spycams were used as advertised

#83

Post by tzs »

metadat wrote: post #4

Is there an archive snapshot of the Towel bar Cam product page as displayed by Amazon? Kinda wondering what the product actually looks like, and how Amazon allowed it to be presented. Edit: whoa, @navels how'd you do that?! Thank you, amazing: https://web.archive.org/web/20230527030738/https://www.amazo... The product reviews are creepy. -- Rest of my comment for posterity: There's an image in TFA, though it's only a…

The "Customers who bought this item also bought" for it is interesting...it seems to be all women's bathing suits.

Re: Judge: Amazon "cannot claim shock" that bathroom spycams were used as advertised

#84

Post by bluGill »

kshacker wrote: post #7

So can I sell a camera with the following description? SpyCam Disclaimer: should not be used for spying

Maybe. Can you should legitimate uses that people actually buy this for? There are legal uses for a spyCam. Check with your local laws though as what is legal is different in different areas. For example you can use a spyCam to see who/what is knocking over your garbage can - anything you film would be legal. I'm sure there are a lot of other legal uses for a spyCam.

Re: Judge: Amazon "cannot claim shock" that bathroom spycams were used as advertised

#85

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF »

space_fountain wrote: post #59
mamurphy wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another commenter posted the archive page. No comment on whether this "made it ok," but some of the other photos show the hooks being used in a different context, more like a nanny cam. This one ( https://web.archive.org/web/20231204210803/https://m.media-a... ) shows hooks in what looks like a mudroom catching an image of a person in black clothing in a ski-mask, indicating a use case of the hook would be to surrept…

Yeah, but I mean I assume the people selling date rape drugs do a bit of wink, wink, nod, nod, thing too. Do you think literally a single person bought this and used it as a nanny cam? I think I can imagine, maybe it got used outside of a bathroom, or got used by people play acting hidden cameras, aka used with everyone's consent, but I don't think it gets much worse than this, except maybe for this other product ama…

> Do you think literally a single person bought this and used it as a nanny cam?

There is actually one person who left a review and seems to have bought it with a less nefarious purpose than spying on someone in the bathroom:

> I set this up on my back window to keep an eye out for any suspicious activity in the area behind our house. We share a communal back yard area and people tend to walk through quite often. I love how this camera is disguised and I can place it anywhere!

However, it does appear to be marketed for the nefarious purposes despite the comical "bad guy with ski mask" you need to hide the camera from for some reason.

Re: Judge: Amazon "cannot claim shock" that bathroom spycams were used as advertised

#86

Post by isk517 »

Sanzig wrote: post #13

Good. Amazon has been happy to rake in commissions for years from dodgy products sold by third party sellers (uncertified electrical equipment, scam flash drives/SSDs, spycams, etc) and then turn around and blame the marketplace sellers when the inevitable happens. Unlike eBay, Amazon goes to great lengths to sow confusion about what it sells versus its marketplace participants. The average user thinks that when they…

I've had to explain to my father so many times that just because you've bought something off of Amazon does not mean that you bought it from Amazon. They really should have a separate store front for 3rd party sellers.

Re: Judge: Amazon "cannot claim shock" that bathroom spycams were used as advertised

#87

Post by tiltowait »

chankstein38 wrote: post #32
bdw5204 wrote: post #9

A spy camera that looks like a towel hook seems like a product that should be illegal to sell. For what legitimate purpose would somebody want a towel hook camera? Don't most people put towel hooks in bathrooms? It seems perfectly reasonable to hold Amazon legally responsible for selling this product even if it was a 3rd party seller (not clear from the article). A product whose intended use is to secretly record vid…

Yeah I thought the quote in the article claiming there were "legitimate and legal uses" was odd. They said "like in-home surveillance" but... why do you need to surveil your bathroom? What legal purpose does that serve? Maybe a way to film burglars while they don't know they're being filmed? But isn't part of the reason security surveillance works is visible cameras making people do the "right thing" or whatever. The…

We have coat hooks that look similar to this in our foyer. I can definitely see a legitimate use for a camera there, and having it be discreet would be great.

Re: Judge: Amazon "cannot claim shock" that bathroom spycams were used as advertised

#88

Post by chickenpotpie »

graphe wrote: post #77
chickenpotpie wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue isn't of potential illegal use, it's an issue of explicit illegal use. The camera description specifically describes how it can be used for illegal purposes. There's a huge difference between selling "stump remover" and "spouse poison" even if they're the same chemical.

Semantics. Besides, spying isn't illegal. It could be used for porn. They get rid of the word spy on the camera, amazon gets a fine and this will now this happen hidden under the surface. It's semantics. What's the real solution to hidden cameras that spy on victims undressing?

> Semantics

Semantics is half of what the legal system is. People spend years in court for what they meant in contract.

> They get rid of the word spy on the camera, amazon gets a fine and this will now this happen hidden under the surface. It's semantics. What's the real solution to hidden cameras that spy on victims undressing?

As I and others keep saying, it's much more than that. The issue wasn't that it said "spy" it's that the camera provides specific descriptions of how to use this camera illegally. I don't understand your need for "the real solution." There is no "real solution" to any human problem. We're never going to prevent this from happening at least once, but we can make iterative changes that make it harder and make it happen less frequently.

Re: Judge: Amazon "cannot claim shock" that bathroom spycams were used as advertised

#89

Post by huytersd »

space_fountain wrote: post #17
metadat wrote: post #4

Is there an archive snapshot of the Towel bar Cam product page as displayed by Amazon? Kinda wondering what the product actually looks like, and how Amazon allowed it to be presented. Edit: whoa, @navels how'd you do that?! Thank you, amazing: https://web.archive.org/web/20230527030738/https://www.amazo... The product reviews are creepy. -- Rest of my comment for posterity: There's an image in TFA, though it's only a…

I mean I also have a morbid curiosity, but is there anything that could have been there that would have made it ok? This isn't lock picks were a lot of people buy them to mess around with and to get back into their own property

Absolutely. Making sure the help is not stealing. Spying on a spouse you suspect is cheating in your home. Filming contractors while they work in a room to make sure they’re not cutting corners etc.

Re: Judge: Amazon "cannot claim shock" that bathroom spycams were used as advertised

#90

Post by tdeck »

bluGill wrote: post #38
belval wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That part is confusing to me because it specifically calls out items that are for violating privacy. Any defense from "we are not responsible for how a product is used as long as it's legal" or "our safety team inspects products that could hurt people" (AC appliance without a properly grounded case) would have sounded much more reasonable to me. The reality of it is probably that reviewers can only spend ~1 minute pe…

You cannot possibly review this in one minute. You need a team of different experts and they need time to think. If you saw this for one minute before looking at this article you probably wouldn't think about this use case - even though it is obvious once someone points it out. So Amazon needs to show they gave the review team enough time to think about this type of thing. Amazon might be able to get out of this if t…

How about this shower head spy camera? Does it take more than a minute to figure out how this might violate someone's privacy?

https://www.amazon.com/Bathroom-Shower-Security-Cameras-Outd...

Post reply on HN