Ring camera flood (by Mary [OH]) Sep 30, 2022 10:28 PM
Ring camera flood (by Mike SWMO [MO]) Oct 1, 2022 9:37 AM
Ring camera flood (by DJ [VA]) Oct 1, 2022 4:39 PM
Ring camera flood (by plenty [MO]) Oct 1, 2022 5:52 PM
Ring camera flood (by John... [MI]) Oct 1, 2022 7:35 PM
Ring camera flood (by Mary [OH]) Posted on: Sep 30, 2022 10:28 PM Message:
Hello
I have a 4 suiter that I installed ring flood cameras on every side including the front where the porches are. We have had some drug activity. We have had one tenant say the camera because it has sound is a personal violation. None of the flood lights with cameras are in private areas. I am going to consult an attorney just wanted other peoples opinions.
Thanks in advance
--69.135.xxx.xxx |
Ring camera flood (by Mike SWMO [MO]) Posted on: Oct 1, 2022 9:37 AM Message:
* * * because it has sound is a personal violation.***
Ask the rooming house lawyer to show you the state statute / law --174.130.xxx.xxx |
Ring camera flood (by DJ [VA]) Posted on: Oct 1, 2022 4:39 PM Message:
I would wonder what they don't want you to hear and see.
Public areas should be fine.
Maybe put up a sign to say "smile, you're on camera!" --68.229.xxx.xxx |
Ring camera flood (by plenty [MO]) Posted on: Oct 1, 2022 5:52 PM Message:
Find out the laws in your state. --172.56.xx.xxx |
Ring camera flood (by John... [MI]) Posted on: Oct 1, 2022 7:35 PM Message:
They very well may be right here. Ohio is a "one-party" state when it comes to "wire tapping" laws. That means that only one party that is part of the conversation has to be aware that it is being recorded. So, for example, if you have a conversation with someone, you can record it without telling them. However, it does appear to be illegal to record a conversation (even non-electronic -- just a plain old conversation) without one party being aware of the recording.
Now, there is an exception for areas where there is no "expectation of privacy." So, that is what it really comes down to here. Does your tenant have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" in those areas?
I'm not sure actually. I could see it argued either way... I don't know what a judge would see. :)
--24.180.xxx.xx |
Reply:
|
|