CCTV Cameras In UK Get Loudspeakers

An anonymous reader writes, "Big Brother is another step closer in the UK where the ever ubiquitous CCTV cameras are being fitted with loudspeakers so that camera operators who spot activities deemed 'anti-social' can berate the citizens below. In January 2004 there were more than 4,285,000 CCTV cameras in the UK (roughly 1 for every 4 households). No data about the number of CCTV cameras now in use in the UK is available."

Summary is disingenuous and sensationalistic

[Tim C]

So I guess at least it's in keeping with the source of the article...

If you RTFA, you'll find that 7 (or 148) cameras in one town (Middlesbrough) are having loud speakers fitted as part of an experiment. While the headline isn't entirely inaccurate, it's definitely misleading as it implies that this is a general thing.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Privacy will become a commodity

[enjo13]

I make fairly frequent trips to London to visit our office there. It's interesting, I talked about these cameras with the guys there (the office is smack in the middle of London) and they all love them. Criminals have circumvented the system by being where the cameras aren't. This has made the highly populated parts London MUCH safer... the privacy issues concern me and the whole thing creeps me out (a lot). However, the system DOES appear to be at least somewhat effective and for anyone living in a highly urban situation that isn't all bad.

Re:interesting...

[Yvanhoe]

And If you have watched the movie, help repair the horrendous reality distorsion field it provoked and go read the original comic by Alan Moore instead. Cause believe it or not, the movie is an example of political correctness

Data Protection Act

[LeRandy]

In the UK, if a CCTV system comprises of more than fixed cameras with a general overview (as found in small shops etc...), it is covered by the Data Protection Act.

If a camera-system can Pan & Zoom or is concentrated on a specific person's activities then

• They have a right to know - Signs must be erected saying who records the images and why
• They have a right to view suitably anonymised images (ie. passers by removed)
• They have a right to contest the results of any automated processing, eg. biometric scanning,
• Images cannot be shared without a confidentiality agreement signed by the recipient (ie. promising to keep person-identifying images private and secure)
• Images must be erased after a reasonable period unless they are needed for a court case. Recording over the tape is not sufficient - they must be permanently erased. In the case of city centre CCTV, 1 month is considered the reasonable maximum, since any offences should have been notified by then. For banks, 3 months, because that is the maximum period between account statements being received by customers.
• A detailed policy must be written and known by operators, listing exactly how, why and when images are recorded, used, and erased. Subjects of the CCTV images must be able to view this policy upon request.
• If images recorded are used to cause undue harm or distress to the subject (law-enforcement uses of a video are not considered undue harm...), they must be erased immediately, along with all copies and any subsequent data purtaining to these images
• The Data Controller at the company recording the images must be registered with the Information Commissioner's office in London.

In addition, even if only fixed cameras are used, the above provisions apply if the images are not being used for law-enforcement alone.
The Information Commissioner can order that any non-compliance be rectified, and since not complying with an enforcement notices is a criminal offence, the Information Commissioner can take the company to court - the fine is unlimited. If harm or distress was caused, they can also order compensation be paid.

If a camera overlooks property not normally visible from the street (back gardens, house interiors, or anywhere you could reasonably expect privacy), the camera owner MUST receive permission to film from the current residents - including tenants, or must ensure the system cannot film these areas. This includes Landlords filming tenants inside the house...

Just to put people in the know - the Data Protection legislation does cover CCTV, and reasonable expectation of privacy is included in the provisions.

Re:1984

[Pharmboy]

How ironic to think that 1984 took place in London

It is Oceania, and Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

Re:My poor friends across the pond :-(

[vidarh]

Go read some crime stats. Crime in the UK is still at low levels compared to the US. And if you look at gun crime levels [who.int] the difference is staggering - the US is at levels unimaginable for any West European country. I doubt anyone here "feel trapped" - I certainly don't. Rather I feel far safer here than I do whenever I visit anywhere in the US, knowing how high the rates of violent crimes are in the US.

Re:Check out the other end

[LordSnooty]

Public access is already happening - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4752167.stm [bbc.co.uk]

Re:Hey You

[ozbird]

Stand STILL Woggy!

It's "laddy", not "Woggy":
"You! Yes, you behind the bike sheds: stand still laddy!" (Pink Floyd, The Happiest Days of our Lives from The Wall.)

Re:Reaction from "across the pond."

[Anonymous Coward]

Jesus F Christ - If it reassured you that you are not allowed to take a picture in the tube, then you are a moron. What were you doing? Taking a photo of an advertisement? Not exactly a terrorist act, is it? And even if you were taking photos of the tube in preparation for a terrorist act, what you were doing is not terrorism in and of itself.

Wake up.

Re:nothing wrong

[amliebsch]

I don't know that you're wrong about your municipality having cameras installed, but if you are talking about these sensors [umn.edu], then those are simple strobe sensors, not cameras. If this isn't what you are talking about, can you provide a picture?

Re:Where do they get figures from

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

You'd have to pride yourself on doing no evil to think that was a good idea...

Although seriously, I noticed on some video footage during the latest airline security fiasco that there are signs up in US airports saying that you're not only being watched, but security staff are actually listening in to your conversations on microphones.

So let me be clear about this. With stated current intentions, not hypotheticals, national governments in "free countries" like the US and UK are now recording where everyone goes by plane, where everyone goes by car, where anyone is seen in the street, and what those people are saying in at least some of these cases. They are also developing technology for facial recognition from a distance and automated numberplate scanning. While they're at it, they can track your general movements if you have a mobile phone switched on, whatever mode of transport you choose. They have security devices that effectively display you naked to the operator. They intercept your phone calls and Internet communications, often on dubious authority, and record these for several years too. Soon, biometric technology will mean everyone gets an ID card and/or passport that are required to access any public services, and will be linked into a centralised database tracking all of your use of those services as well. Putting too much money into your bank account at once triggers alarm bells with the authorities, as does taking too much out.

Now, if, somewhere in that enormous central database they're building of everyone's life, something looks suspicious (sorry, muslims/immigrants/people with the same name as a registered sex offender, you're out of luck this month) then your account can be frozen without appeal, you can be subject to detailed investigations into your finances for the past several years by the tax office requiring you to produce a detailed paper trial for everything, you can be arrested and held for (depending on where) weeks, months or even years without trial, your freedoms can be curtailed with arbitrary ASBOs and control orders even if the law doesn't provide for that kind of curtailment otherwise, and in the worst case, you get seriously hurt or killed in a screwed-up operation.

And they still worry that the bottle of cola you're holding at the airport might blow a plane out of the sky.

Oh, yes, it's a wonderful, free world we live in, said the Anonymous Brave Guy, glancing at his .sig...