Slashdot Mirror
What are My Rights Against Video Surveillance?
Violated Privacy asks: "A video bugging device was recently discovered in the bathroom of the house I share with three others. After sharing this find with one of the housemates, I am sure whose camera it is. Needless to say, we're both rather upset over the matter. What are our legal rights in this matter? It's not the government doing it, but another private citizen with whom we willingly (until now...) share a house. Are there special considerations? (Yes, I should ask a lawyer. I plan on doing that tomorrow when I get a chance. The problem is, most lawyers aren't exactly experts in this area.) Has anyone on Slashdot done research into this field of privacy law?"
"We" is the voters in the state and the legislation. AFAIK the bill has been passed, but is tied up in some committee...
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
It's illegal in all 50 states (I'm assuming you're in the US). It often falls under the Peeping Tom laws but, there are also more stringent and specific laws in many places. In many states the person will become a registered sex offender, as they should be.
Here's a case from 2002. This story, dated August 2004, sounds very much like yours.
"Hit them where it hurts"
I'd suggest in the balls.
Same advice if your roomate is female - the clitoris is quite sensitive (news to most Slashdotter's) and a good kick between the legs will have a satisfactory effect.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
DNA is a Turing machine. You, however, being dynamic and emergent, are not.
IANAL, but I am a law student (admittedly a lowly first-year).
Your options here will definitely vary by what state you're in. There may be a state law against unauthorized recording (for instance, the one Linda Tripp violated in Maryland, although I don't know the particular law and I'm not sure if it would apply here).
More likely, though, you could have a civil claim (not criminal), although this would again depend on what state you're in. This might represent an "intrusion upon seclusion" or "invasion of privacy" tort - you should research the law on this in your state, or get a lawyer to do it for you (probably the better idea). If you happen to be in California (or even if you're not), I know some cases that might be relevant just because I just had an assignment on this sort of thing - Shulman v. Group W Productions, Sanders v. American Broadcasting Corporation, Walker v. Darby, and Sanchez-Scott v. Alza Pharmaceuticals. (California Supreme Court, California Supreme Court, 11th Circuit, and California Appellate Court, respectively)
Of course, this does not constitute legal advice - just some ideas on where you might want to research. You should absolutely call a lawyer.
I posted that because it was the quickest way to make people understand what I was talking about. It was late and I had work in the morning. Story subissions are lame without links, and I didn't exactly feel in the mood to start building a web site around my discovery. Here's my little makeshift page with a few more details on the insides of the bastard.
± 29 dB
Added a picture of the front of the unit to my page.
To answer your question, the clock just didn't look right. I'm not paranoid, but apparently at least curious enough to look closely.
The clock/radio/camera had been displaced in the bathroom by a larger/better mini-stereo a week or two ago. This past weekend, it was put back up on the shelf and plugged in. That was the source of my initial curiosity.
What got me really thinking was the lack of a tuning indicator. Actually, I was trying to figure out if the holes lit up with LEDs to show approximate tuning or what, and how the tuning of the radio worked. I peeled back the sticker on the front, and noticed the 3/4"-or-so lens assembly behind the leftmost hole.
It appears the tuning indicator was one of the casualties of the conversion to a camera, though the radio itself still works fine. In the pictures, you'll also note that the space for the back-up 9V battery is taken by the transmitter. Otherwise, the clock is still as fully functional as the day it rolled off the Sony production line.
± 29 dB
Did take pictures, but I'm not sure about the search aspect. I'll take that up with the police when the time comes (soon). My name is on the lease, but I would love to find a way to limit the scope of any searching/seizing done. I'd prefer not to have all of my electronics shuffled through and held while the courts grind away, and I know the other two (innocent) roomies feel that way too.
(By the way, we *do* rather plan on finding a new house-mate, whether it be by his moving out or ours.)
± 29 dB
Honestly, I'd rather not have made this discovery; I'd rather not be involved at all.
The problem is liability. I know about the camera, as do both of my other victimized housemates. There have been other residents of this house eith the perv before any of us three came along. I have no idea if/when/how they'll react, but I definitely do NOT want to be on the wrong side of the law when that happens.
± 29 dB