The Internet of Things and the Right to Record
Bill McCabe
Founder | IoT Recruiter | SoftNet Search Partners, LLC | IoT Consulting | AI & ML Recruiter | Consulting for Industry 4.0 and IIoT | Smart Manufacturing Solutions
Today there are over 5 billion connected devices in the world that make up the Internet of Things (IoT). Research firms like IDC and Gartner predict that within five years’ time, this number will skyrocket to 25 billion. Although we often think of the ways these IoT devices can make our lives easier, make our homes smarter, improve manufacturing, and even revolutionize healthcare, there are some uses for IoT that aren’t as straightforward.
One of these, is how IoT has changed our ability to record the world around us, and immediately share what we capture. Combined with social media, this ‘right to record’ has brought into question when it is appropriate or not appropriate to record. More importantly, is it legal?
The Legalities of Recording in Public
Smartphones, tablets, and even connected eyewear are all part of IoT, and they’re all capable of recording pictures and video. The most obvious example to look at is the phenomenon of members of the public recording law enforcement officers, performing their duties.
- There are a number of states that have an ‘all parties consent’ law, requiring that subjects be made aware of video, image, or audio capture that is taking place.
- There is a clause, however. There should also be a reasonable expectation of privacy on behalf of the subjects. This means, with interpretation, that filming in public places, without consent, would be acceptable and legal.
- Illinois and Massachusetts have ‘all parties consent’ laws, however they don’t allow for the provision regarding the expectation of privacy. In 2010, Tiawanda Moore was arrested for attempting to record law enforcement personnel with a cell phone. She was later acquitted of all charges (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-08-25/news/ct-met-eavesdropping-trial-0825-20110825_1_eavesdropping-law-police-officers-law-enforcement).
- It is not legal to record on private property, to make commercial gain from recorded material of another person’s likeness, or to use recordings to commit libel.
The Right to Record is a Two Way Street
Tech Republic, a leading trade publication for IT professionals, recently ran an opinion piece on how IoT and smart devices can cause controversy when it comes to the right to record. (http://www.techrepublic.com/article/the-right-to-record-is-not-a-question-of-technology-but-rather-power-and-policy/).
The article not only discussed the recording of law enforcement by private citizens, but also how it can be beneficial for law enforcement officers to constantly record their daily duties. Doing so would add a layer of transparency, and would serve to protect the interests of officers and their relevant governments, as well as the general public. This recording would be in addition to the already present police vehicle dash cams, and the surveillance cameras in most urban centers.
The questions then, are not as much about recordings been made in the first place, but rather about how they are used. Two key questions are;
- Should law enforcement agencies have the right to publish footage or images of suspects before they have been convicted of crimes?
- Should individuals have the right to publish police activity when footage or an image doesn’t portray an event or incident within its full context?
The Internet of Things is hugely dependent on constant information, easy accessibility to information, and the almost instant distribution of that information. IoT has changed the way that people expect services to work. Almost one third of those surveyed by the American Red Cross in 2012 would expect law enforcement or emergency assistance if they posted a request for help on a public social media website. Would those who are embracing social media be happy to post controversial images or videos of law enforcement agents in the line of duty? What if they were the ones being featured on a law enforcement social media account?
As more connected devices are able to easily record and share the world around us, lines will become blurred when it comes to rights. The ‘right to record’ could be considered a civil liberty under the right to free speech, so does the government share that same right? As IoT devices become more commonplace, and the internet of everything becomes a part of daily life, these questions will be answered, laws will be tested, and new precedents will be set.
20 million more IoT devices will be installed, carried, or worn by people at all levels of society, by 2020. Users and creators of IoT technologies will need to keep a close eye on ‘the right to record’, and how it impacts the industry and public perception of these devices in the years to come.
Give us your opinion by clicking Here
Posted in IOT Security | Tagged connected medical devices, connecting internet ready devices, right to record
Data Scientist
7yThe issue of recording as understood in this article is mostly concerned about image, audio and video, but the IoT is much more than that. With sensors embedded in all types of devices, we have suddenly access to an unbelievable amount of information which itself may open the door to other inferred information. The information that is collected by your doctor about your health is also relevant to your health insurance company. Your "meta-data" becomes data if instead of electric consumption we focus on "presence", etc... I do not know how such complex issues can be resolved in an easy way.
Life skipper and data navigator ,sailed the Atlantic coast of Europe, met new people,made new friends,learned a million skills & then departed for a trip in Science (no,its not an island)
7yIoT and the benefits for society... Sorry i am not convinced.If some lost their ability to enjoy life ,submerged in dark rooms in front of screens,convinced by "Defence" theorists that this way we(who s we?) have this as the only way to maintain and better our lives(as hmuna species),.. I say unless we rediscover the true essence of BALANCE,the world is going to fall on our heads.No human will escape this fate ,this total destruction,and it all will be a result of some arrogant,full of complexes ,smal men /women ,who in their total incapabillity to live life,they are trying to create worlds that do n ot exist and will never offer happiness to humnanity. Self deluded,scientists only in name,(all these idiots who study in Universities funded by defence funds,companies that care to enslave you for profit and so on.. Sorry but no thanks. If it was up to me,i d set some bounds that anyone who d cross them would get out of this planet to go and find their dream world in another solar system(since they think they can overcome nature). Science should be all about bettering our lives,not making some rats rich. Science should have ethics and laws,and should bot have been left to the devices of multinationals ,whpo create science in their private universities,flooding the world with pseudoscience or lies,that suit their profit seeking plans. If ther sd one thing we all must stricve for ,this should be to bring in science ethos.To kick out all the greedy vultures that only care for profit and do not care about consequences. As an example i have the great NAZI atom uncle that USA protected after the WW2,only to get the secrets .. I d hung hium in the first moment.Instead they turned him into a hero,that would rtake them to the stars and of course above all ,they d be able to beat the russians(who app[arently did the same without employing nazi criminals)...but that another story. So are we prepared to turn a blind eye (again) to crimes against humanity only to achieve whatever ...???Not me.I
Autistic, Online and Loving IT Community Developer
8yDoes this mean that [A + B] = C or [ A = B = C] Where does 'D' the world governing bodies fit into these equations. Vazhakodan Govindan you are wrong. The chose to choose to choose has been eroded over time. Therefore the partial statement of "what is wrong will be dictated by time" is totally out of context. The 'blind' cannot see the quiet indoctrination behind the fluff. Check out how the children of our children already are being microchipped. Or as a precursor are wearing micro-chipped clothing phones and so forth. Time allows for indoctrinations. Voices bring forth awareness. Please prove me wrong in this belief. And on that point I believe the micro-chips are now able to be implanted midbrain. Place the nano devices are now three carbon layers think [ 2 carbon cells think] and when the microchips are removed the carbon layers are left behind. In these carbon layers are all the data any Government needs to monitor us. Again I welcome you to prove me wrong with this now 5 year old information.
Autistic, Online and Loving IT Community Developer
8yIs The Internet of things and the right to record a case of falling [A + B ] does not = C. or [A + B + C] all share the same laws. C = the Government. Heading more into having no designated borders re internet So where would D go should D be the World Governing Bodies? And NO +Vazhakodan Govindan Time will not dictate things. These things are already dictating to us. They are quietly being slipped into everyday existence eliminating our right to choose to choose. If you do not agree then prove me wrong please.
Founder at Global Bee Village
8yThank you for the post Bill. It is of interest to know that IoT is increasing in geometrical proposition and the legality of legal rights could be a major issue when IoTs are born every moment. Growth is imminent. Let us make use of it at best. What is right and what is wrong will be dictated by time.