logo elektroda
logo elektroda
X
logo elektroda
Advanced Search
logo elektroda

Regulations for Displaying Monitored Object Plaque in Private Home Monitoring Systems

aodbg1 33426 36
ADVERTISEMENT
Treść została przetłumaczona polish » english Zobacz oryginalną wersję tematu
Reply | New topic
  • #31 19554590
    zybex
    Helpful for users  
    cichy koksik wrote:
    even if there is no publication or other use of the recordings and photographs obtained from these cameras. Therefore, it is not decisive that the recordings have not been published anywhere or made available to third parties.

    How will my neighbor know if I'm recording anything? After all, I can have dummy cameras, because you can buy them too. By the way, if I wanted to record someone without their knowledge, I would definitely not expose the cameras and hide them cleverly. :wink:
  • ADVERTISEMENT
  • #32 19554609
    cichy koksik
    Level 16  
    kood wrote:
    Besides, I see that in these cases the cameras were installed not to protect their property but to spite the neighbor

    And I see you're interpreting the facts as you see fit.
    In both cases, the court punished the owners of the installed cameras and how they explain is only because they did not want to bear any consequences - it's really hard to understand???

    kood wrote:
    I would like to ask you to indicate where the court refers to the GDPR?


    Judgment of the Court of Justice of 11 December 2014, case number C-212/13Private video surveillance and purely personal or household activities

    Added after 6 [minutes]:

    zybex wrote:
    How will my neighbor know if I'm recording anything?

    It's a court order...
    In any case, a neighbor may ask if the cameras mounted on your building/tree/pole looking in his direction cover his area.
    .
    zybex wrote:
    By the way, if I wanted to record someone without their knowledge, I would definitely not expose the cameras and hide them cleverly.

    We're bouncing the ball now :)
    What difference do you see between recording someone with a camera on your house and one that is hidden in the bushes?
  • ADVERTISEMENT
  • #33 19554641
    kood
    CCTV and Stationary Alarms specialist  
    cichy koksik wrote:
    Judgment of the Court of Justice of 11 December 2014, case number C-212/13Private video surveillance and purely personal or household activities


    I'm ending this discussion because you clearly don't even know what you're talking about, you're just pasting what pops up in google without thinking.

    You are only embarrassing yourself by posting judgments from 2014, and the GDPR you refer to entered into force in 2018.
  • ADVERTISEMENT
  • #34 19554677
    cichy koksik
    Level 16  
    kood wrote:
    You are only embarrassing yourself by posting judgments from 2014, and the GDPR you refer to entered into force in 2018.

    You gave a show :)
    I knew it would be too hard for you to handle :)
    It doesn't matter when the GDPR entered into force because this sentence contains the content that you defend so much here and you don't even understand it.

    And it doesn't matter that your neighbor may bring a civil suit against you because only one article is valid, which is de facto "explained" in the Court's judgment and leaves no doubt as to who is right.

    Also for you and your clients:
    kood wrote:
    Just read Article 2 GDPR


    Good luck then :)
  • ADVERTISEMENT
  • #35 19555003
    zybex
    Helpful for users  
    cichy koksik wrote:
    zybex wrote:
    By the way, if I wanted to record someone without their knowledge, I would definitely not expose the cameras and hide them cleverly.

    We're bouncing the ball now :)
    What difference do you see between recording someone with a camera on your house and one that is hidden in the bushes?

    I mean, if I wanted to catch a prankster who, for example, destroys someone's property, I would record him with a hidden camera. Of course you'll tell me the law will be on his side, but I don't care at this point. :wink:
  • #36 19555115
    cichy koksik
    Level 16  
    zybex wrote:
    I mean, if I wanted to catch a prankster who, for example, destroys someone's property, I would record him with a hidden camera.

    You are a golden neighbor because not only do you look after your own property, but also someone else's :)
    zybex wrote:
    Of course you'll tell me the law will be on his side

    None of these things.
    The court issues a verdict and the law is interpreted differently, which is visible in the higher courts.
    Well, but here we are discussing surveillance on private property.
  • #37 19556249
    moon09
    Level 15  
    All right. What if I have a mask on for recording, but there will be no mask on live view? It can be like that? I mean, for example, a piece of road that will be visible on the side of the frame. Nothing like pointing the camera at the neighbor to look specifically at his windows. Because from what I looked at in the recording software that I have, there is a mask for recording, but not necessarily for live preview.
Reply | New topic
Report a violation of the law

Topic summary

The discussion revolves around the regulations and considerations for displaying monitored object plaques in private home monitoring systems. Users express that there is no legal obligation to display such plaques, but opinions vary on their effectiveness as a deterrent against theft. Some suggest that dummy cameras can serve as a scare tactic, while others argue that revealing the presence of monitoring systems may alert potential intruders. The conversation also touches on GDPR implications, indicating that private individuals are not required to disclose personal data on monitoring signs unless the surveillance extends beyond their property. The consensus leans towards the idea that if monitoring is confined to one's own property, there is no need for signage, but caution is advised regarding the visibility of recorded areas.
Summary generated by the language model.
ADVERTISEMENT