Wednesday 11 December 2013 20:00 UTC
This forum is for anything to do with light aviation
To be clear, I fully support your reasons for doing it. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression.
As for the sign thing, I share your view, but respectfully suggest checking if it is a legal requirement.
(Not camera related, but I have been on the receiving end of a trespasser having more rights than would seem fair).
Here, here, it's a bad old world out there, you do what you have to do ...
A bit like the guy who made the news recently when he recorded calls regarding PPI claims, and then sent the company a bill for his time. During a media interview he said that he records all his phone calls. when asked if he had to tell people he was recording the calls he said no ... you don't have to tell them .. .same as taking their picture I would have thought.
That looks like an excellent piece of kit, especially the remote notification. It is a shame that most of the PAYG data SIMS have expiring credit now.
If you only have a temporary need or have mains power then it is also possible to re-purpose an old Android mobile phone (or a new one, they're down to £60 or so now) with various free applications :
https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... vity&hl=en
Of course, now you've advertised the camera and what it costs, some scroat will be along to nick it..
Sim only deals are quite cheap now -
Are you sure about that?
My understanding is that if the camera picks up images only from Monococks premises, then no sign required, and is outside the data protection act as it is 'Domestic purposes'. Include public areas in shot, or property of a neighbour then a sign is required, as is compliance with data protection act.
High streets DO advertise the fact that CCTV is in operation. The sign is as much a deterrent as compliance with law.
I also don't think it can be used as evidence in court, as there are strict rules on gathering crime vids. Use it as a 'heads up' as you indicate.
You will note from my location, and I can show you that I can enter from many directions and there are no signs to that effect. Likewise when you arrive by train (or car) in C London & elsewhere you step into an arena filled by CCTV cameras, without any notice visible or written, warning of the presence of CCTV and what there use is for. Also evidence can be used subject to PACE and Judges direction (viz 7/7).
It could indeed be used as evidence in court and would be treated in the same way as any other evidence. I was in the cctv business a few years ago when certian software developers were trying to get the law to only allow watermarked video to be used in evidence. There was a House of Lords study into this which concluded that CCTV would be used in the same way as any other evidence. i.e. the scrote would need to prove that his fizog had been photoshopped perfectly onto every one of the 30 frames per second recorded, rather than assume that was the case as the film wasn't watermarked. It was also reasoned that having such laws would mean that a murder captured on someones holiday video would be automatically excluded as evidence, so it was sensibly decided that cctv or video footage may be presented in the same way as any other evidence.
Also regarding notices. Not required if you are filming covertly to capture someone committing a crime. Thats why benefits cheats get caught playing football whilst claiming they are wheelchair bound. You don't need to tell them you are having them followed around by a camera crew.
Who is online
Login / Register