You guys also have the vote on copyright changes coming up soon, too. Interesting times for content creators.
Upvote
0
Maximilian said:[...]
BUT:
If you constantly film a scene in case a crime could happen (e.g. car dash cam) this again is forbidden.
You're welcome.mb66energy said:Maximilian: Thanks for providing these compact and very readable pieces of information!
This system (with storing only the last few minutes) is not finally decided by the highest courts.Maximilian said:[...]
BUT:
If you constantly film a scene in case a crime could happen (e.g. car dash cam) this again is forbidden.
As far as I know there is some gray zone: If the camera films constantly but stores only the last e.g. 10 minutes a dashcam system is accepted - and the video material can be used in a trial as body of evidence.
Late to the conversation, but this is what I do for a living.So is photography covered or not? And does this affect how the photo magazine interpreted it?
See how messy this gets....?
The processing of photographs should not systematically be considered to be processing of special categories of personal data as they are covered by the definition of biometric data only when processed through a specific technical means allowing the unique identification or authentication of a natural person.
In your opinion.
The lawyers consulted by the German magazine said otherwise:
And how do the laws define 'personal use'? My picture of my wife/sister?
My picture of a stranger in the street?
What happens if the stranger decides to use the new laws to make me delete all those frames with him in them because of a breach of privacy?
. I work with sensitive personal information every day and once it was limited to 'can you identify his person immediately '(picture or name/DOB) but it has moved to 'will it narrow down the search' (if you use postcode ) to 'how easy would it be for someone to deduce their identity'. .
Nor are they under any obligation to, except in general "we may obtain and use..." terms - to do more could well compromise investigations, and there's an explicit exemption allowing them (us) to avoid that happening.But I doubt police and other government agencies are notifying all the people photographed in high resolution and put in databases.
Of course they will never share those databases with other countries or corporations.
But all data protection legislation is in its infancy
and there is no clear definition of what is justifiable.
And, of course, the government can justify whatever it wants....
how quickly or easily an individual can be identified has never been at issue.
The fact is that government depts are so paranoid about reputational damage, that they don't do lots of the things that legally they can do.
"Of course they will never share those databases with other countries or corporations."
"Of course"? Wrong, in spades. About 90% of my day job is about facilitating the lawful, proportionate sharing of personal data with other government and law enforcement bodies for the purposes of crime prevention and detection.