Car registrations personal data ?

jenny smith

are car registrations data under data protection act? it is illegal to film illegally parked cars and post them online showing reg. it is just a curiosity regarding a conversation i had.

jenny smith

jenny smith wrote: »

are car registrations data under data protection act? it is illegal to film illegally parked cars and post them online showing reg. it is just a curiosity regarding a conversation i had.

It's in a public place, if there are no faces or information on view, don't think it would be a data protection issue.

GreatDefector

Personally I'm all for it but there was a legendary thread going in here for ages but sadly for closed due to the legalities of it all. Boards didn't want the hassle

If your slapping up dashcam footage on YouTube it'll be reported for sure by people who wouldn't be up there were it not for their poor parking skills... and you'll have hassle trying to keep your page online

K.Flyer

GreatDefector wrote: »

Personally I'm all for it but there was a legendary thread going in here for ages but sadly for closed due to the legalities of it all. Boards didn't want the hassle

If your slapping up dashcam footage o9n YouTube it'll be reported for sure by people who wouldn't be up there were it not for their poor parking skills... and you'll have hassle trying to keep your page online

Ah yes, the old Obnoxious Parking thread.
IIRC that was closed due to some advocating causing damage to peoples cars for being badly parked, with some people going as far as identifying owners.
Regarding the O.P., I don't think there is anything illegal in itself about posting a picture of a badly or illegally parked car. Take a look at the dash-cam thread on motors and there is plenty of footage of car drivers up to no good, with some of them where you can see their reg plates.

Edit: Actually it was closed more to do people wanting to publicly indentify people.


http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2055438379/554

Mod
Over the course of this thread there has been countless warnings regarding publishing information on poor parkers. Trying to get other posters to send a link to the guy for your own amusement and then insulting him? This is not on, common sense should tell you that. Infracted.

And while I'm at it, well done. Thread closed pending discussion, but don't hold your breath people. There was a warning given 3 days ago that this would happen.

jenny smith

K.Flyer wrote: »

Ah yes, the old Obnoxious Parking thread.
IIRC that was closed due to some advocating causing damage to peoples cars for being badly parked, with some people going as far as identifying owners.
Regarding the O.P., I don't think there is anything illegal in itself about posting a picture of a badly or illegally parked car. Take a look at the dash-cam thread on motors and there is plenty of footage of car drivers up to no good, with some of them where you can see their reg plates.

Edit: Actually it was closed more to do people wanting to publicly indentify people.


http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2055438379/554

I am not advocating that or making any comment on the driver of the car. The conversation was just about just uploading it and let people make their own mind up. Why would it be a struggle to keep the site online if it is a public place?

There is a very good facebook page that publishes pictures of cars parked in disabled spots with no disabled badge on display.
If it's in public, then it is public.

K.Flyer

jenny smith wrote: »

I am not advocating that or making any comment on the driver of the car. The conversation was just about just uploading it and let people make their own mind up. Why would it be a struggle to keep the site online if it is a public place?

I don't remember there being an issue with the pictures per say, or even the poster saying things like "...just look at this idiot!". The problems really started when people started to get personal.

coylemj

jenny smith wrote: »

are car registrations data under data protection act?

No

jenny smith wrote: »

it is illegal to film illegally parked cars and post them online showing reg.

No.

Look at it this way, the tabloids are forever printing photos of 'celebrities' staggering out of night clubs clearly under the weather. Some of the real celebrities (e.g. Kate Moss) have very deep pockets and could sue the bejaysus out of the papers if the law allowed it but it doesn't. So if I park my car across two parking bays or in a disabled bay in a public place, someone photos or films it and posts it online, there is nothing I can do about it.

Robbo

Any data capable of identifying a person can be personal data. I'm not aware of our own DPC taking a view on it but the ICO in the UK has on a couple of occasions ruled that they can (in particular when registrations are part of a photo which is taken). Therefore, the usual rules of data processing apply.

This is before we get into areas like a unique car that may identify an individual, a unique registration, a sole trader having their name emblazoned on a vehicle, the valley of squinting windows that is smalltown Ireland etc.

Unless these photos/videos are taken on your own property and confined to your own personal use (clarified in Rynes), people are going to have to think a little deeper than "it's on public view, I can do what I want" in justifying this.

jenny smith

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/cyclists-may-breach-data-laws-with-on-board-cameras-413613.html

Wouldn't this apply? Uploading them would not be personal or household activity? And what about all the footage of the water protests that are on countless facebooks

Robbo

jenny smith wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/cyclists-may-breach-data-laws-with-on-board-cameras-413613.html

Wouldn't this apply? Uploading them would not be personal or household activity? And what about all the footage of the water protests that are on countless facebooks

Sharing them is outside the personal/household exemption. That particular exemption has often been likened to your own personal address book at home (if people keep such a thing these days) in that it contains the personal information of others but is not available to all and sundry.

The water protest type of videos could present issues. It's up to the subjects to exercise their rights and obtain their own advice.

K.Flyer

jenny smith wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/cyclists-may-breach-data-laws-with-on-board-cameras-413613.html

“Our general guidance in this area is that we would consider that body-worn cameras should only be activated in extreme cases in response to specific pre-defined criteria, where it could be justified for security and safety purposes,” reads the report.

I have a problem with this section.
I do believe that dash-cams and body / helmet cams have saved people (and insurance companies) from fraudulent claims and helped to determine who may be at fault in an incident.
If the proverbial is just about to hit the fan I think the last thing anyone needs to be doing is fumbling for the On / Record switch.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

fred funk }{

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Define a famous person in legal terms.

prinzeugen

As the Garda Traffic keep reminding people (mainly cyclists) on Twitter, Everyone has the right to a good name.

Posting up a reg online that people may recognise and accusing them of committing a crime or traffic offence is not on.

They have also said that it is a data protection issue (for them).

jenny smith

prinzeugen wrote: »

As the Garda Traffic keep reminding people (mainly cyclists) on Twitter, Everyone has the right to a good name.

Posting up a reg online that people may recognise and accusing them of committing a crime or traffic offence is not on.

They have also said that it is a data protection issue (for them).

I did not mention accusing them of a crime.

Pro Hoc Vice

jenny smith wrote: »

I did not mention accusing them of a crime.

From the OP "illegal to film illegally parked cars" illegal parking is in breach of criminal law.

starshine1234

It cannot be a breach of data protection to take a photo in public.

It may become a breach at a later stage depending on your use of the photo, and your status as either a private person or as a business.

It is legal to take a photo in public and to publish that photo. Even if the photo contains a badly parked car with the reg visible.

It is not legal to post those photos to a public website AND encourage violence or retribution against the bad drivers.

It is likely implied that a website which exists for the purpose of publishing badly parked cars is likely to encourage violent retribution against the bad parkers, even if that's not the intention of the site owners.

In other words, it's not possible to systematically publish pictures of badly parked cars, on a website like BadParking.com, without putting those car owners at risk of retribution. A simple disclaimer on the site that the site owners don't intend for violent retribution makes no difference. Users of the site may ignore the disclaimer and engage in violence. The site owners cannot prevent that and so they cannot systematically publish in the first place.


A private individual can publish a single picture, or a small group of pictures, without this issue. A newspaper could publish a crowd scene even if there is a badly parked car in the background with the reg visible. A person could publish a wedding photo on Facebook or elsewhere; where the photo was taken in a private hotel carpark for example even if there's a badly parked car with the reg showing in the background.


In other words, it's not the presence of badly parked cars with visible regs which are the problem. It is the intent of the publisher of the photo, and also the likely outcome of publishing which are important.

jenny smith

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

From the OP "illegal to film illegally parked cars" illegal parking is in breach of criminal law.

it is illegal to film illegally parked cars and post them online showing reg

I meant to ask is it illegal to film illegally parked cars and post them online showing reg not say it is

only saw error now

jenny smith

starshine1234 wrote: »

It cannot be a breach of data protection to take a photo in public.

It may become a breach at a later stage depending on your use of the photo, and your status as either a private person or as a business.

It is legal to take a photo in public and to publish that photo. Even if the photo contains a badly parked car with the reg visible.

It is not legal to post those photos to a public website AND encourage violence or retribution against the bad drivers.

It is likely implied that a website which exists for the purpose of publishing badly parked cars is likely to encourage violent retribution against the bad parkers, even if that's not the intention of the site owners.

In other words, it's not possible to systematically publish pictures of badly parked cars, on a website like BadParking.com, without putting those car owners at risk of retribution. A simple disclaimer on the site that the site owners don't intend for violent retribution makes no difference. Users of the site may ignore the disclaimer and engage in violence. The site owners cannot prevent that and so they cannot systematically publish in the first place.


A private individual can publish a single picture, or a small group of pictures, without this issue. A newspaper could publish a crowd scene even if there is a badly parked car in the background with the reg visible. A person could publish a wedding photo on Facebook or elsewhere; where the photo was taken in a private hotel carpark for example even if there's a badly parked car with the reg showing in the background.


In other words, it's not the presence of badly parked cars with visible regs which are the problem. It is the intent of the publisher of the photo, and also the likely outcome of publishing which are important.

i did not ever say or imply that or anything about "systematically publish pictures of badly parked cars, on a website like BadParking.com, "

hullaballoo

There is no simple answer to your question, jenny, because there are divergent views on what you are talking about. Some lawyers believe that the type of thing you are talking about beaches data protection, others believe it doesn't.

There hasn't been a judicial pronouncement in relation to it that hasn't left some vital aspect out so neither side of the debate has yet had a judicial champion.

I suppose the one thing to say is that it isn't illegal, but might be unlawful. Hardly much help but there you go.

prinzeugen

By posting a reg number and saying "illegal parking" or "dangerous overtake" by 00-D-1234567, you are acting as judge and jury.

What if that car is sold the day you post the pic/video? You have given the new owner a bad rep.

That is why the Garda keep telling people not to post pics or videos with reg numbers online.

You could find yourself in trouble.

IRAC War

K.Flyer wrote: »

I have a problem with this section.
I do believe that dash-cams and body / helmet cams have saved people (and insurance companies) from fraudulent claims and helped to determine who may be at fault in an incident.
If the proverbial is just about to hit the fan I think the last thing anyone needs to be doing is fumbling for the On / Record switch.

That's not actually how they work in fairness. Older types had a keep button but mine easily holds a month worth of recordings in glorious 1080p Technicolor.

K.Flyer

IRAC War wrote: »

That's not actually how they work in fairness. Older types had a keep button but mine easily holds a month worth of recordings in glorious 1080p Technicolor.

I think you may have misunderstood my point.
The extract from the news article I quoted, the commissioner had stated that cams should only be "activated" in extreme cases..

“Our general guidance in this area is that we would consider that body-worn cameras should only be activated in extreme cases in response to specific pre-defined criteria, where it could be justified for security and safety purposes,” reads the report.

My interpretation of those recommended guidelines would be, that the cam should be always off and only switched on as a need arose. Hence my point about having to think about switching it on while concentrating on getting yourself out of a dangerous situation.

Esel

K.Flyer wrote: »

I think you may have misunderstood my point.
The extract from the news article I quoted, the commissioner had stated that cams should only be "activated" in extreme cases..



My interpretation of those recommended guidelines would be, that the cam should be always off and only switched on as a need arose. Hence my point about having to think about switching it on while concentrating on getting yourself out of a dangerous situation.

Are you sure that's not just about Gardaí wearing / using body-cams?

Ursus Horribilis

So what about YouTube channels such as this one by CycleDub? https://www.youtube.com/user/CycleDub The guy records his confrontations conversations with motorists, makes their car registration details known and uploads the video footage to YouTube,. It's unlikely he's doing this with their permission. The people featured in his videos don't appear to have a right of reply either. Their face and car/car reg are up there for all to see but we don't have that sort of information about him.

starshine1234

Ursus Horribilis wrote: »

So what about YouTube channels such as this one by CycleDub? www .youtube. com/user/CycleDub The guy records his confrontations conversations with motorists, makes their car registration details known and uploads the video footage to YouTube,. It's unlikely he's doing this with their permission. The people featured in his videos don't appear to have a right of reply either. Their face and car/car reg are up there for all to see but we don't have that sort of information about him.

I'd suggest he's doing it in a personal capacity.

His footage is legally obtained as he's in public places when he takes it. He's not encouraging retribution. He likely doesn't have many followers and so there isn't a huge chance of retribution here. He isn't hosting his own website.

I agree though that if he was doing the same thing, but to a much larger degree, or if he was asking others to also send him videos for him to publish, then he might have a problem. I haven't watched his vids by the way.

YouTube themselves could have a problem here. They are facilitating the cycle guy. They are a business and perhaps they should be more careful. If they are faciliating many cycle guys then perhaps overall they are reaching a threshold.


I feel the only issue with publishing photos is whether or not you are being reckless with other peoples safety. That means you have to hit a certain threshold before you are reckless. I feel the cycle guy above probably doesn't reach that threshold. A dedicated website like BadParking.com would likely hit the threshold. YouTube, who do publish lots of videos, may or may not reach the threshold here, it's hard to know.

jenny smith

Ursus Horribilis wrote: »

So what about YouTube channels such as this one by CycleDub? https://www.youtube.com/user/CycleDub The guy records his confrontations conversations with motorists, makes their car registration details known and uploads the video footage to YouTube,. It's unlikely he's doing this with their permission. The people featured in his videos don't appear to have a right of reply either. Their face and car/car reg are up there for all to see but we don't have that sort of information about him.

sounds like a major clown. some has claimed to expose him