CCTV outside property

rawwrrrr

Good evening everyone,

I hope you are all well. I live in a housing estate and I am eager to put up CCTV outside my house. I have purchased a camera online and I haven't put it up yet. I have been reading up on legislation and I will ensure that the camera only faces my own property. I am wondering about appropriate signage. I have a small (A8) sticker that I intend to place beside my door to indicate that CCTV is in operation. Would that be sufficient? Probably thinking too much but God forbid anyone said I breached their GDPR! Thanks all!

DubCount

AFAIK, there is an exemption under GDPR for recording your own personal property. I think the important point is that you are only recording your property and garden etc., and not your neighbours. I dont think signage is necessary. I think there was a ECJ case on it called the "Rynes" case, which might be worth an online search.

rawwrrrr

Thank you for your reply. I've had a look at that... I think I'll put up a sticker to be sure, but thank you!

Thoie

https://www.thejournal.ie/data-protection-twitter-fine-december-5304509-Jan2021/

An article from this morning which doesn't touch on signage, but seems to say that if you only use the footage inside your own house, and don't capture any neighbouring areas outside your property perimeter, then there's no GDPR implications, and you're not a data controller.

It's something I'm interested in as well - I want to get a video doorbell, but trying to ensure that I get one where I can set the boundaries, as my front door faces a footpath and a green area at the end of the drive. So I need to be able to aim the camera so that it's not capturing anything beyond the end of my driveway. My understanding is that if I only capture my property, then I don't need to put up signs.

rawwrrrr

Thoie wrote: »

https://www.thejournal.ie/data-protection-twitter-fine-december-5304509-Jan2021/

An article from this morning which doesn't touch on signage, but seems to say that if you only use the footage inside your own house, and don't capture any neighbouring areas outside your property perimeter, then there's no GDPR implications, and you're not a data controller.

It's something I'm interested in as well - I want to get a video doorbell, but trying to ensure that I get one where I can set the boundaries, as my front door faces a footpath and a green area at the end of the drive. So I need to be able to aim the camera so that it's not capturing anything beyond the end of my driveway. My understanding is that if I only capture my property, then I don't need to put up signs.

Thank you! A few houses in my estate do have cameras and don't have signage, but I want to be sure that I'm not breaking any laws. Going to put a sign up to be sure!

cubatahavana

I suppose that for a doorbell camera, once you’re not recording private property it should be fine. I reckon the pavement and road should not be a problem, as it is a public place and you’re not holding data identifying the people passing by. I may be totally wrong, though

FionnK86

cubatahavana wrote: »

I suppose that for a doorbell camera, once you’re not recording private property it should be fine. I reckon the pavement and road should not be a problem, as it is a public place and you’re not holding data identifying the people passing by. I may be totally wrong, though

They talked about this on The Hard Shoulder on Newstalk today.

You’ve to do a self-assessment of data protection as you might be asked for same if DP Commission receives a complaint.

Apparently complaints have increased a lot the last year.

TheChizler

cubatahavana wrote: »

I suppose that for a doorbell camera, once you’re not recording private property it should be fine. I reckon the pavement and road should not be a problem, as it is a public place and you’re not holding data identifying the people passing by. I may be totally wrong, though

DPC sees it otherwise on the public space issue. I don't get how it's different to recording a video on your phone in public TBH which is fine but that's their position.

Caranica

There are steps up to my front door (duplex) that also go to my next door neighbour's place. I need to see the steps for security so I do get the comings and goings next door as well. I've a sticker up but can't do much more. Ultimately it's for both of our security.

FionnK86

FionnK86 wrote: »

They talked about this on The Hard Shoulder on Newstalk today.

You’ve to do a self-assessment of data protection as you might be asked for same if DP Commission receives a complaint.

Apparently complaints have increased a lot the last year.

I was listening to that. As a professional photographer I have a decent grasp of the law in this regard, and whoever the guest was that they had on the show, really shouldn't have been on, as he was clearly making it up as went along.

Caranica wrote: »

There are steps up to my front door (duplex) that also go to my next door neighbour's place. I need to see the steps for security so I do get the comings and goings next door as well. I've a sticker up but can't do much more. Ultimately it's for both of our security.

My personal opinion on signs:

A notice/sign is a nice thing to put up to be 'by the book' but in real life, it does two things:

1. Makes the area look rough (when you see CCTV signs on people's houses it makes you question the place)

2. Brings nuisance from the nosey neighbours who all of a sudden are experts in CCTV and GDPR and claim to know all the rules (they don't). They'll either torment you because they don't want you looking at them, or you'll get never-ending requests from one or two neighbours to look at your cameras because Facebook told them there's a man in a white van abducting children in the area (there's not).

Best thing to do, is install the cameras, forget about them and then never show anyone else what you can see, unless you're actually friends with them (and not just random neighbours).

Also, have a cover story. Your door handle was broke and someone tried to break in. Doesn't matter what the story is, but have it ready to go incase John from down the road wants to know why you've cameras.

I should point out, though, that most of these issues are things i've heard from friends and the CCTV installers. I personally have never had anyone give any grief or hassle, and a couple of houses have CCTV in my (rough) area, so it's not unusual. Most of us have fairly subtle dome cameras, but one or two houses have the more obvious 'bullet' ones.

Anyway, enough of my opinion. The Law in Ireland is fairly straight-forward and generally speaking, just comes down to 'reasonable expectation to privacy'. For example, you can record someone walking on the path outside your house. You can put them on Youtube without their consent (if they do something funny or such) (provided you're not making money off it or using it for business purposes).

A person on a footpath has no 'reasonable expectation to privacy'. However, people do have a reasonable expectation to privacy in, for example, their back gardens.

So if Mary next door is going out into the street, and your camera can see her going to work, or reversing out of her parking space and hitting a car, or whatever, she can't complain that you seen her, because anyone in a public place could see her and she has no expectation to privacy there. In a 'typical' house estate, no one has a reasonable expecation in their front garden as theyre almost all overlooked by the public roadway/street.

However, if Mary decides its a lovely warm day out, and decides to lie out in the back garden and whips her juggs out for a bit of a tan, and sees your camera, you're in trouble, because, although you, in theory, could stick your head out the window and get an eyeful of her, the likelyhood of that happening is so low that it would be 'unreasonable' to expect you would do it. As such, Mary has a reasonable expectation to privacy in her back garden.


You can figure out most other situations you're likely to bump into by simply applying that logic: "would I expect privacy if I was here?".

cubatahavana

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I was listening to that. As a professional photographer I have a decent grasp of the law in this regard, and whoever the guest was that they had on the show, really shouldn't have been on, as he was clearly making it up as went along.




My personal opinion on signs:

A notice/sign is a nice thing to put up to be 'by the book' but in real life, it does two things:

1. Makes the area look rough (when you see CCTV signs on people's houses it makes you question the place)

2. Brings nuisance from the nosey neighbours who all of a sudden are experts in CCTV and GDPR and claim to know all the rules (they don't). They'll either torment you because they don't want you looking at them, or you'll get never-ending requests from one or two neighbours to look at your cameras because Facebook told them there's a man in a white van abducting children in the area (there's not).

Best thing to do, is install the cameras, forget about them and then never show anyone else what you can see, unless you're actually friends with them (and not just random neighbours).

Also, have a cover story. Your door handle was broke and someone tried to break in. Doesn't matter what the story is, but have it ready to go incase John from down the road wants to know why you've cameras.

I should point out, though, that most of these issues are things i've heard from friends and the CCTV installers. I personally have never had anyone give any grief or hassle, and a couple of houses have CCTV in my (rough) area, so it's not unusual. Most of us have fairly subtle dome cameras, but one or two houses have the more obvious 'bullet' ones.

Anyway, enough of my opinion. The Law in Ireland is fairly straight-forward and generally speaking, just comes down to 'reasonable expectation to privacy'. For example, you can record someone walking on the path outside your house. You can put them on Youtube without their consent (if they do something funny or such) (provided you're not making money off it or using it for business purposes).

A person on a footpath has no 'reasonable expectation to privacy'. However, people do have a reasonable expectation to privacy in, for example, their back gardens.

So if Mary next door is going out into the street, and your camera can see her going to work, or reversing out of her parking space and hitting a car, or whatever, she can't complain that you seen her, because anyone in a public place could see her and she has no expectation to privacy there. In a 'typical' house estate, no one has a reasonable expecation in their front garden as theyre almost all overlooked by the public roadway/street.

However, if Mary decides its a lovely warm day out, and decides to lie out in the back garden and whips her juggs out for a bit of a tan, and sees your camera, you're in trouble, because, although you, in theory, could stick your head out the window and get an eyeful of her, the likelyhood of that happening is so low that it would be 'unreasonable' to expect you would do it. As such, Mary has a reasonable expectation to privacy in her back garden.


You can figure out most other situations you're likely to bump into by simply applying that logic: "would I expect privacy if I was here?".

This is what I thought. As a semi-professional (it’s been a while since I’ve done paid work) photographer too, I read the law a few years ago. I was not sure if GDPR changed anything

cubatahavana

cubatahavana wrote: »

This is what I thought. As a semi-professional (it’s been a while since I’ve done paid work) photographer too, I read the law a few years ago. I was not sure if GDPR changed anything

GDPR is really more in relation to the publishing of material, rather than recording it. But it hasn't really changed much/anything to be honest.


Sure take a flick through a newspaper; if GDPR worked the way people think it works, there'd be nothing but text and a 'Page 3' photo.

Mjolnir

[Deleted User] wrote: »

GDPR is really more in relation to the publishing of material, rather than recording it. But it hasn't really changed much/anything to be honest.


Sure take a flick through a newspaper; if GDPR worked the way people think it works, there'd be nothing but text and a 'Page 3' photo.

Afraid you're wrong there, the ECJ ruled in the Rynes case, that home cctv systems that capture publicly accessible areas outside of your property(e.g footpath) or neighbours yards etc fall under data protection laws. The domestic use exemption was ruled to not apply.

Remember EU law has supremecy over Irish law so that ruling is binding here.

poker--addict

I think some of you are over thinking this. ECJ or not.

Presumably you are installing CCTV to see who is knocking on your door or for security, and the area of focus is your property and not the street or next door, as such who is ever going to know what your CCTV captures? If the top corner shows the street but the other 80% captures the burglar stealing your car, I don’t see the judge or Garda commenting on the top corner let alone prosecuting you over a poorly lined up camera

Put the camera up, make best endeavours to capture only your property and your needs. Don’t go showing off the picture to every nosey neighbour.

Yourmama

When I installed my camera it was impossible to avoid neighbors driveway. I record only when movement is detected and I set the mask of the movement so it ignores neighbors side. I let the neighbor know this camera records his space but only when movement is detected on my side and they are fine with it.

Manion

Deleted User wrote: »

GDPR is really more in relation to the publishing of material, rather than recording it. But it hasn't really changed much/anything to be honest.


Sure take a flick through a newspaper; if GDPR worked the way people think it works, there'd be nothing but text and a 'Page 3' photo.

GDPR applies to data collection, storage and processing as well as publishing.

Mjolnir wrote: »

Remember EU law has supremecy over Irish law so that ruling is binding here.

This is not really correct. EU Regulations are transcribed into member state legislation. EU Regulations don't have any effect until they are pasted into law by the legislative bodies in each member state.

Mjolnir

Manion wrote: »

GDPR applies to data collection, storage and processing as well as publishing.



This is not really correct. EU Regulations are transcribed into member state legislation. EU Regulations don't have any effect until they are pasted into law by the legislative bodies in each member state.

It is correct, its the princepal of primacy, however in more recent times countries such as Germany amongst others have decided to ignore certain ecj rulings to suit themselves and their national law.
Rulings are considered common law not legislative and ecj rulings are technically binding on member states.

On the point of the neighbours if they are aware and fine with it great. Also very unlikely unless you have a true busybody around that anyone would question where your camera records.

antoinolachtnai

Manion wrote: »

This is not really correct. EU Regulations are transcribed into member state legislation. EU Regulations don't have any effect until they are pasted into law by the legislative bodies in each member state.

This is untrue. See Article 288 TFEU.

Manion

Mjolnir wrote: »

It is correct, its the princepal of primacy, however in more recent times countries such as Germany amongst others have decided to ignore certain ecj rulings to suit themselves and their national law.
Rulings are considered common law not legislative and ecj rulings are technically binding on member states.

I make no comment on the jurisdiction of the ECJ. My point related to the idea of EU laws and supremacy.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

This is untrue. See Article 288 TFEU.

OK, fair enough as a directive we didn't need to transpose it into Irish law, but we did under the Data protection act 2018 which would be the relevant legislation.

KaneToad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

However, if Mary decides its a lovely warm day out, and decides to lie out in the back garden and whips her juggs out for a bit of a tan, and sees your camera, you're in trouble, because, although you, in theory, could stick your head out the window and get an eyeful of her, the likelyhood of that happening is so low that it would be 'unreasonable' to expect you would do it. As such, Mary has a reasonable expectation to privacy in her back garden.

Quick question, do you have Mary's eircode handy?

antoinolachtnai

Manion wrote: »

I make no comment on the jurisdiction of the ECJ. My point related to the idea of EU laws and supremacy.



OK, fair enough as a directive we didn't need to transpose it into Irish law, but we did under the Data protection act 2018 which would be the relevant legislation.

The DPA 2018 is not a transposition of GDPR into Irish law.

I have a ring spotlight camera, and one of the good things about it, is that you can set zones for coverage and also now "privacy zones" which you can use to black out the neighbour's property entirely. It does need a good wifi connection though.

(eta) I do have a ring sticker in the main window, tucked up in the corner, too.

Manion

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The DPA 2018 is not a transposition of GDPR into Irish law.

https://www.itgovernance.eu/en-ie/data-protection-ie

antoinolachtnai

Manion wrote: »

https://www.itgovernance.eu/en-ie/data-protection-ie

This says exactly what I just said.

Mjolnir

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

This says exactly what I just said.

I'm not sure they understand what transpose means... or how the law works in a practical sense.

Manion

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

This says exactly what I just said.

I'm glad we're in agreement

j4vier

I have internet security cameras pointing towards my porch. Due to the setting of the street, it is inevitable that a bit off the footpath and from my neighbor's porch also is within the picture-not much I can do to avoid it.

Don't think you will run into any issues with the law.

As a matter of fact, once I was asked by the Gardai if I could provide them with images as a theft had happened on the street and the camera did pick up some "movement"

rawwrrrr

Thanks all... it's one of those more obvious "bullet" cameras that I have. So am I correct in thinking that I don't have to put up a sticker stating I have CCTV? Again, obviously doing my utmost to ensure that it doesn't capture the footpath!

Mjolnir

Mjolnir wrote: »

Afraid you're wrong there, the ECJ ruled in the Rynes case, that home cctv systems that capture publicly accessible areas outside of your property(e.g footpath) or neighbours yards etc fall under data protection laws. The domestic use exemption was ruled to not apply.

Remember EU law has supremecy over Irish law so that ruling is binding here.

GDPR relates to everything in terms of recording, what I meant was it's more prominent in the area of publishing content. Anyone who's likely to fall foul of GDPR will do so because of publishing issues, not recording issues.

That said, however, it still stands that in Ireland, you can record in a public space. There's no law that actually states you can't, and as per this article, it's accepted in our courts (I shortened it)

In this jurisdiction (Ireland)... The recent prosecution of the murder of Patricia O’Connor is an example. The CCTV system of a neighbour covered part of the property of Mrs O’Connor and was used as evidence in the hearing.
While a strict application of Rynes would indicate that such footage could be excluded from a case due to it having no legal basis, the Irish courts would appear to allow such footage in the criminal context.

I didn't read all of this link, as it drags on a bit, but the first paragraph or so sets out the practical aspect of photo/video recording in Public:

http://priorystudios.ie/2020/03/08/photography-public-vs-private-property-copyright-law-in-ireland/


Which is much the same as this article, albeit this one is older (nothing has really changed, though)

https://www.digitalrights.ie/photographers-rights/#


As I've already said, though, if GDPR worked here, the way people interpret it to work here, there'd be nothing other than Page 3 and Football in the newspapers. Scumbag John getting dragged out of court after being convicted of murdering the milk man wouldn't be in the paper if it were enforced the way some think - a public place is generally a free-for-all (and long may it remain).

KaneToad wrote: »

Quick question, do you have Mary's eircode handy?

I do, actually, she has:

Offaly B1G T1T5

An Ri rua

I've used the Alfred app and old Android cameras for at least 4-5 years now and put up stickers as one neighbour liked to deal. It was to advise him to never make the mistake of crossing my wall as he attempted to evade Gardaí/whoever. He understood the message and we lived in harmony for those years.

Before I put up stickers, I had another neighbour (Hyacinth Bucket meets Angela Fletcher) who complained to me about my security cameras (I was using webcams and IP cameras being driven by a heavy duty piece of software, Felenasoft. She had discovered them as her son was peeking in through my blinds ie 30ft inside my property line. When I explained the legal position, and my position, along the lines of KKV's excellent post, she recalibrated her approach to my filming her kids on my property i.e they never breached MY privacy again. This kid was 10, not an infant by the way.
I do believe in warning stickers. I use them at my home and my mother's to ward off dogwalkers who foul the outside lawn. Works a charm.
Have also had great fun watching an ethnic Irish handyman cover his face to protect himself from the imaginary CCTV in my car and the dummy in the window (PTZ plugged in and visibly on, not networked though) while a separate discreet camera upstairs (old Android) filmed his suspicious lying ways.
Best of luck Op. Don't let your cameras dominate you. Set up triggers, quickly scan through stuff to see what's suspicious, who might be casing etc. Remarkable how prescient you can become Even in terms of friends /people who called before but never said. I had people waltzing in and snooping around my homeplace. Thing of the past now. Nosy people don't like being rumbled.