“Ring, the company behind the wildly popular doorbell cameras, announced on Wednesday that it would no longer share its footage with police departments, after campaigners raised concerns about privacy.

The Amazon-owned company did not give reasons for its decision, but it is being seen as a move to try and relieve fears of constant surveillance.

In a blog post on Wednesday, Ring said it will end its 'Request for Assistance' tool, which allows police departments and other public safety agencies to request and receive video captured by the doorbell cameras through Ring's Neighbors app.

The new policy is coming into effect this week, although cops can still obtain the footage using a warrant - and homeowners can share it voluntarily with investigators if they so wish. …”

DailyMail article:
https://mol.im/a/13009053

'Privacy concerns' for people out in public??

I like the decision. Homeowners should have control over their video not some giant Corp.

To be clear, LEOs have two options after this decision:

Be personable and go door to door asking for footage. In my neighborhood, likely a 95% success rate, but I realize that some neighborhoods would be less than 5%.

Get a warrant.

quote:

The new policy is coming into effect this week, although cops can still obtain the footage using a warrant - and homeowners can share it voluntarily with investigators if they so wish. …”

Yes, I would prefer to own my own recordings. I can share if I want.

quote:

Originally posted by tatortodd:
I like the decision. Homeowners should have control over their video not some giant Corp.

Yup.

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
'Privacy concerns' for people out in public??

We have several cameras around the property. All of them capture ME and my family on our property in addition to whoever may pass by on the public street.

So it definitely is about MY privacy.

It is also about the privacy of the deer, moose, rabbits, bobcats, raccoons, marmots, and birds on my property

^^^ BINGO! It's about the owners', not everyone else's, privacy.

Recordings will still be on YouTube, though!

The "bad" Police are putting away "underprivileged" citizens ??

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
'Privacy concerns' for people out in public??

We have several cameras around the property. All of them capture ME and my family on our property in addition to whoever may pass by on the public street.

So it definitely is about MY privacy.

It is also about the privacy of the deer, moose, rabbits, bobcats, raccoons, marmots, and birds on my property

Admittedly, I did not read the whole article, just the snippet in the OP, which indicates that 'campaigners' raised concerns. Reading the whole article doesn't 'really' provide clarity on who the campaigners were, and any real details on the decision, so I'm not sure I'm much more informed now that I've read it. I will admit that my first impression re: the statement pertaining to 'privacy concerns' was that they (Ring) would be acting so as to protect the privacy of those that would be up to no good, so there's that.

Honestly, the fact the Ring had control of the video in the first place is why I'll NEVER have a Ring Doorbell, or ANY of their other products either!

quote:

Originally posted by tatortodd:
I like the decision. Homeowners should have control over their video not some giant Corp.

To be clear, LEOs have two options after this decision:

Be personable and go door to door asking for footage. In my neighborhood, likely a 95% success rate, but I realize that some neighborhoods would be less than 5%.

Get a warrant.

Todd, you do realize that now you cannot contact Ring and request that recording of the people who broke into your house and stole everything of value WILL NOT BE FORWARDED TO THE POLICE AT YOUR REQUEST. In fact that request may trigger Ring to delete that video out of concerns for the Criminal's Privacy.

My plan on dealing with this is simple, I am going to contact Ring and ask them what purpose a Ring camera system provides if it cannot be used to assist the Police in reducing crimes.

Privacy be damned, if you are out in public there is zero expectation of privacy and if they are actually on my land I am the one who controls any images taken on my land, NOT Ring.

quote:

WILL NOT BE FORWARDED TO THE POLICE AT YOUR REQUEST.

Then IF you want to provide the Police with any footage, at your discretion, download it yourself and forward it, yourself.
I am sure the bad guys will say chain-of-evidence or something like that but what the hell?  

quote:

Originally posted by Scooter123:

quote:

Originally posted by tatortodd:
I like the decision. Homeowners should have control over their video not some giant Corp.

To be clear, LEOs have two options after this decision:

Be personable and go door to door asking for footage. In my neighborhood, likely a 95% success rate, but I realize that some neighborhoods would be less than 5%.

Get a warrant.

Todd, you do realize that now you cannot contact Ring and request that recording of the people who broke into your house and stole everything of value WILL NOT BE FORWARDED TO THE POLICE AT YOUR REQUEST. In fact that request may trigger Ring to delete that video out of concerns for the Criminal's Privacy.

My plan on dealing with this is simple, I am going to contact Ring and ask them what purpose a Ring camera system provides if it cannot be used to assist the Police in reducing crimes.

Privacy be damned, if you are out in public there is zero expectation of privacy and if they are actually on my land I am the one who controls any images taken on my land, NOT Ring.

You're off in left field. The homeowner can download any video they want and share with the police or anybody else they wish with a few clicks. That's how Ring videos end up on YouTube, X, etc. No big brother Corp involved in obtaining footage.

Like I said, LEOs can be personable with the homeowner and they'll get the footage.

@Scooter123, that’s not what the article said, at all.

Now, apparently Ring still has real privacy issues - for some reason their employees can access recordings, at will, which is illogical.

And they need to clarify under which emergencies they will share recordings on an “emergency” basis.

(It makes sense for active home invasions, kidnappings, etc etc, but they need to articulate the times they will do so.)

A few years back, a Ring camera recording solved a murder in the small town of Brooklyn, Iowa, just East of Des Moines. A 19 year old college student disappeared while she was jogging on a coutry road outside of town.

The case went cold until police got a Ring recording from someone's house that showed a car going down the same road just minutes after she was jogging there.

Police identified the car as belonging to an illegal alien who lived in town. He led police to her body and confessed to killing her. Got life in prison.

I dont know how police got the video, but it was months (as I recall) after the murder so I would assume it came from Google somehow. Doubt most people store their footage that long.

Although Ring recordings can be valuable, it is no different than any other digital evidence, like your cell phone. Ask or get a warrant.

Why the hell anyone would let someone else have control of the images that their cameras capture is beyond me. If I install cameras on my property, those images are my property as well.

... Or so they say.

quote:

Originally posted by 400m:
Why the hell anyone would let someone else have control of the images that their cameras capture is beyond me. If I install cameras on my property, those images are my property as well.

Because it’s in the TOS. The Terms of Service that everyone blindly agrees to because the new gadget won’t function at all unless you have agreed to the TOS.

Well, that’s my point, I’m not signing up for any service that has access to my cameras.

Here you can see the native fauna getting all restless around my JT. If the police want to use my footage to capture said fauna, they can also be the responsible ones and feed the fauna daily, and give head and belly scratches. Otherwise, he didendonuffin.