Public Dashcam Footage and Privacy Laws

aspirepranesh on 05/11/2020 - 16:41
Last edited 05/11/2020 - 18:48 by 1 other user

This was originally posted on Dashcam owners Australia whom I have been following for a while and has since been picked up multiple News outlets.

Apparently, the genius here has now threatened to sue DOA via a Law firm. You can find this on their facebook page

I am really curious to know what OZB community thinks about this kind of behaviour, which should fall in line with most of the FB comments as spackbace mentioned here and also, the privacy laws around dashcam footage in public places?

My reason for posting it here, to make idiots like these outed so that they realize they cannot threaten people and get away with it.

Automotive

Comments

      • apsilon on 05/11/2020 - 18:37
        +5

        They're going to be busy sending letters.

        • kma on 06/11/2020 - 23:08

          I am glad people are giving them one start reviews. Probably all ozbargs should!

    • tsunamisurfer on 05/11/2020 - 19:42
      -1

      The letter was poorly written.

      But I feel it's a little unfair to target the lawyers representing a dill for a client.

      • brendanm on 05/11/2020 - 22:01

        They are conveyancing solicitors. The "client" is very likely a friend or family member.

      • ankor on 07/11/2020 - 01:40

        if a lawyer can't write letters, then what are they good for?!

      • trongy on 07/11/2020 - 20:55
        +1

        A lawyer has an ethical obligation to act in his/her client's best interest. If this client's interest was in minimising adverse publicity, the lawyer hasn't done a very good job.

    • mhz on 06/11/2020 - 08:59
      +4

      Someone has changed their description and pic to a public toilet lol

      • capslock janitor on 06/11/2020 - 10:45

        direct link? dont see it anymore

        probs the reviewer talkingbout stalls lol

      • lachhelix on 07/11/2020 - 09:27

        I saw that - couldn't stop laughing 😂

  • Willco88 on 05/11/2020 - 18:37
    +2

    Pretty sure dash cams are in a public arena, videos are of public roads, pretty sure there's no law against taking footage of a public road incident?

  • cynicalmike on 05/11/2020 - 18:50

    damn i shoulda posted this while it was still relevant and hidden under the guise of a legal question easily solved by a google search

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-21/driver-allegedly-stab…

  • brendanm on 05/11/2020 - 18:54
    +13

    Looks like the guy is on ozbargain, this post has been reported for "other". OP has better get ready for their angry letter from a conveyancing solicitor.

    • capslock janitor on 06/11/2020 - 10:47
      +1

      We won't yield like DCOA did:)

      • Kangal on 06/11/2020 - 13:33

        Did they actually yield?

        I remember seeing that video earlier on DCOA Youtube. Did they remove it? Or make it unlisted? Or offer apologies?

        • apsilon on 06/11/2020 - 13:37

          Don't know, I some them reply on one of the many, many threads on Reddit and asked if they removed it or Youtube but they didn't reply.

        • Baghern on 06/11/2020 - 20:05
          +2

          Original with no blurring

          https://vimeo.com/475666907

          Forget looking up the license plate, looks like he's already had it de registered

          • tee123 on 08/11/2020 - 14:20
            +1

            @Baghern: Wooow, first of all whst happened to respect to women and acting like a gentleman and then the clown cant drive and takes it out on her lol.

          • brendanm on 08/11/2020 - 17:19
            +2

            @Baghern: Not sure what others were on about saying she did the wrong thing, that guy cant drive for crap, why did he reverse straight back at her after she had backed up?

        • cookietime on 08/11/2020 - 22:54

          I saw a few posts on their FB page saying that the video was removed by both Youtube and FB for violating "community standards". Someone was busying reporting the video :)

          • Kangal on 08/11/2020 - 23:30

            @cookietime: That's bs. Just shows all the weaknesses within the system.

            I think Google needs to do the right thing, and hire thousands of workers among dozens of countries. And they need to have a humans reviewing disputed content. Their policies are vague at best, and at worst, well I don't even want to imagine the worst case scenario if we keep following this path.

          • whooah1979 on 08/11/2020 - 23:39
            +1

            @cookietime: It will get reposted over and over again. The driver may as well move to the bush where they don't have internet.
            https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Man+in+Jeep+thr…

  • AustriaBargain on 05/11/2020 - 19:37
    +10

    It's not a crime to ruin someone's reputation by telling the truth about them and revealing evidence of their behaviour. Why are you even asking our opinions on this, who among us would agree this guy has a right to keep his threat break her neck a secret? It's un-Australian to let bastards keep their bastard secrets covered up. The more someone tries to cover something up the more I want it exposed.

    • Willco88 on 05/11/2020 - 19:47

      Exactly this, we live in a public internet world, there's no privacy

      • AustriaBargain on 05/11/2020 - 19:48
        +10

        People are entitled the reputations they deserve, not the reputations they have. Words to live your life by.

        • cynicalmike on 05/11/2020 - 20:26
          +4

          ^^ AustriaBargain has never made a mistake in his life and has a 100% perfect reputation

          • AustriaBargain on 05/11/2020 - 20:30

            @cynicalmike: Sometimes you need to get your hands dirty and risk making mistakes. Words to live your life by.

            • cynicalmike on 05/11/2020 - 20:31

              @AustriaBargain: but if you do something wrong the public internet world will give you a bad reputation :P

              • AustriaBargain on 05/11/2020 - 20:50
                +6

                @cynicalmike: Sometimes you need to be quick to admit your mistakes. The best thing this guy could say is "I'm terribly sorry for what I said, violence against anyone and especially women, has no place in modern society and I regret and am concerned that the thought came so easily to me in a moment of baseless rage". Something along those lines would diffuse the situation a lot and it's closer to the right thing to do, state what you did wrong and apologise, make no excuses for it. Instead of paying the lawyers he could have donated the money to a women's shelter or violence against women group, would have thrown a bucket of water on the whole thing. But if he was the kind of person to do that, then he wouldn't have been the kind of person to threaten to break people's necks in the first place. He can't even bring himself to pretend to apologise and to fake regret over it.

                Just like in the new Russell Crowe movie, this (profanity) probably still thinks she is the one who needs to apologise to him for beeping at him due to his own inattention. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unhinged_(2020_film)

                • Willco88 on 05/11/2020 - 20:53
                  -3

                  @AustriaBargain: Yeah unfortunately on unhinged she was unjustly rude & arrogant to him.

                  Of course i do not condone his behaviour but she could have easily diffused the situation has she just apologized at the start.

                  • AustriaBargain on 05/11/2020 - 21:05
                    +1

                    @Willco88: For beeping at him? He made her miss the light. If it were the other way around Crowe’s character would have honked the horn at her even angrier.

                    • Willco88 on 05/11/2020 - 21:23
                      -4

                      @AustriaBargain: Yes but when you could see how angry he was getting its best to de-escalate

                      • AustriaBargain on 05/11/2020 - 21:32
                        +1

                        @Willco88: For her it would have been best. For the women in the video here it may have been best, if she did react as angry as he did, maybe he really would have broken her neck. Her submitting to his threat of violence in silence, and walking around the rest of her life carrying that threat around in her head in secret, that only perpetuates the very problem of casual murderous violence against women, and other men, being the norm for a lot of men. Uploading the video was the right thing to do, he can't carry out his threat after the world hears him make it. He can't do anything to her anymore without the police putting two and two together and saying "hey wait a minute, does this have anything to do with her exposing you in that video?".

                        • Willco88 on 05/11/2020 - 21:54

                          @AustriaBargain: Yeah totally agree his behaviour in this video is ridiculous and he deserved to be brought to attention to hopefully curb his behaviour

                  • oranglama on 06/11/2020 - 14:02
                    +2

                    @Willco88: so he can be angry and she has to tolerate that? while she can't? why?

                    why don't you tell him to not be angry, i'm confused.

                • brendanm on 05/11/2020 - 22:02

                  @AustriaBargain: That Russel Crowe movie is so incredibly bad. Literally walked out midway through and went to bed.

          • Kangal on 06/11/2020 - 13:36

            @cynicalmike: Damn right.
            Who was the guy that posted about getting a reward for retuning a wallet, saying that's a Swiss custom? I keep getting them mixed up with AustriaBargain lol.

        • Vote for Pedro on 08/11/2020 - 20:40

          I’m Batman

    • Kranbone on 06/11/2020 - 02:09
      +1

      I agree with your post. As long as the video is factual and truthful (not altered or doctored to bias one party) then it shouldn't be seen as defamatory nor should it be covered up or censored.

      The male who threatened the woman now feels embarrassment and shame because he's being publicly humiliated, and rightly so. He should feel shame and be shamed, it's a great punishment as well as a deterrent for others.

      I hope his name is released and it's widely reported (but from a factual standpoint).

  • pegaxs on 05/11/2020 - 23:07
    +7

    And this kids, is why you don’t let your interns or work experience kids write legal documents.

    • djkelly69 on 06/11/2020 - 09:42

      Sadly enough, I think that was probably written by a lawyer, just one with no idea what he or she was talking about.

    • Luo18740 on 06/11/2020 - 09:44
      +1

      I lost it at "Murry" Bridge.

      • capslock janitor on 06/11/2020 - 10:49
        +1

        I lost it at RE: "WOMENS" couldn't even get the title right

  • [Deactivated] on 06/11/2020 - 07:33
    +2

    There is case law, you can't claim privacy in public.

    That being said, if your face gets on youtube, tough luck.

  • John Kimble on 06/11/2020 - 07:36
    +5

    "our client has received negative threatening feedback in various forms which include but are not limited to various threats of violence and defamatory remarks"

    You don't say?! I wonder why that is??? How about he owns up and apologises for his despicable behaviour instead of trying to bury it with a bullshit letter?

    I'm willing to bet if she didn't blow her horn and reverse (to give him even more room than he needed), and he reversed into her…he would have said "you rammed your car into me, I'm gonna break your fckn neck!"

    • capslock janitor on 07/11/2020 - 18:17

      YO where can I find honking etiquette? and for highbeam signalling? fr

  • User210686 on 06/11/2020 - 08:33
    +3

    In the footage she says “it’s one way” repeatedly but the guy in Jeep isn’t going the wrong way, or am I missing something?

    I hate it when reversing out, a car behind me honks fretting that I might hit them even though I have a reversing camera and can see there’s plenty of room. I’d be worried if a reversing car in front of me was a battered car that probably has no reversing camera tho.

    • John Kimble on 06/11/2020 - 08:47
      +1

      Well, he appears to be reversing into her direction…that would be the wrong way…

      But would you jump out and verbally abuse them? No (or I hope not).

      • [Deactivated] on 06/11/2020 - 08:58

        what direction do you reverse in Mr. Kimble? last time i checked you have to reverse into the wrong direction of a road way in order to position your vehicle in a way so you can put it in forward motion to drive down the correct path of travel.

        • John Kimble on 06/11/2020 - 09:06

          Obviously, but in that moment I can forgive the DC driver for being concerned the guy could have been trying to continue to reverse/travel backwards…watching that happen live would have been incredibly confusing at first. Why risk a collision if you can alert the driver of your presence? She also reversed a little to give him even more room and he still got a bit too close.

            • John Kimble on 06/11/2020 - 09:27
              +1

              @[Deactivated]: Disagree.

            • oranglama on 06/11/2020 - 14:06
              +1

              @[Deactivated]: wrong

              • [Deactivated] on 06/11/2020 - 15:09
                -4

                @oranglama: no, i am right. it's just that too many people are outraged at his reaction that they can't be bothered analysing the video correctly because they're quick to judge someone going over the top.

                it's a good thing that dashcam owners don't get to dish out their own justice and people that actually make real judgements are trained and empathetic people.

                police normally do absolutely nothing here, maybe a caution for him - because no-one was actually injured and there wasn't any property damage.

                his worst outcome is that he is fired from his job and can't afford to put food on the table. if that happens the outcome might actually be much worse than this - all thanks to the internet bullies.

                • oranglama on 06/11/2020 - 15:42
                  +1

                  @[Deactivated]: agree to disagree then, i still think you're wrong

                • kanmen on 06/11/2020 - 15:47
                  +6

                  @[Deactivated]: I don't know why getting out of your car after being horned at twice to you seem like a rational response. They were warning horns to notify the other driver they were getting too close and unnecessarily reversing.

                  If you get agitated over someone beeping at you then it seems like you need to work on your responses and what triggers you rather than blame it on someone else when you go over the top.

                  Nothing this man did was rational.

                  • [Deactivated] on 06/11/2020 - 22:41
                    +1

                    @kanmen:

                    unnecessarily reversing

                    wow, he's unnecessarily reversing now? isn't that what you do when you want to get out of a parking spot?

                    If you get agitated over someone beeping at you then it seems like you need to work on your responses and what triggers you

                    how do you "work" on this? it's aggressive and illegal. i don't see why anyone should have to work on anything if someone is misusing their horn.

                    Nothing this man did was rational.

                    i'm not disputing that, i'm just saying that she did a few things that were not rational either.

                    someone already mentioned the face to face dressing down is the best method of diffusing a situation. i think he just didn't see himself in the wrong and for all we know he was well aware of how close she was because he continued to reverse even after she beeped the first time so you could see there was plenty of room.

                    • kanmen on 06/11/2020 - 23:16

                      @[Deactivated]: I suggest you watch the video again. Firstly, here were 4 beeps heard in the video but only two of them were hers that you can hear louder as it was from her car and not outside and hear her press her horn.

                      Secondly half of his reversing was unnecessary. He did not need to go that far back, he clearly has no spatial awareness to know how to drive his car as he should have started turning a lot earlier on first go and also he reversed back a second time with his wheel in the wrong direction so he again backed up into her path instead of being more aligned with the road.

                      The only thing that doesn't make sense about what the women did was say that it was one way, but I probably would have horned twice too if a car was reversing into my path twice. I don't think that's aggressive at all. They were warning beeps.

                      You clearly seem to think there was some kind of rationality in the mans' behaviour- I would suggest some form of help around anger and anxiety management would be helpful.

                      • [Deactivated] on 06/11/2020 - 23:38
                        -3

                        @kanmen: i suggest you actually learn the definition of provocation and maybe get some experience in driving around a shopping centre car park because most of the time people don't leave enough room or are extremely impatient.

                        he did need to go far back because of the pillar. he failed to make it out the first time and this is extremely common. you can call him a shit driver and say he SHOULD have done this and that but it doesn't matter. i've seen much worse reversing jobs than this and you really need to be patient in these circumstances and she wasn't.

                        the woman saying it was one way was just the typical women's way of changing the subject to something that's irrelevant. he wasn't happy with HER beeping even though he was doing it as well. they were both wrong.

                        you accuse me of needing anger and anxiety management but you're also pushing your own interpretation of events like everyone else. i think you're the one that anger and anxiety management because you can't handle the fact that someone has a different opinion to you.

                        there's always a reason for everything - even violent outbursts. it's your (and everyone else's) demand that he be completely to blame when there are obvious contributing factors here that triggered him (she even admitted to her child that she was beeping).

                        it's not clear from the video whether he was beeping or someone else in the car park was beeping either. could have been someone behind her beeping and upset that she nearly reversed into them.

                        • kanmen on 07/11/2020 - 00:22

                          @[Deactivated]:

                          Provocation: action or speech that makes someone angry, especially deliberately.

                          She wasn't impatient, she was reminding him she was behind him. He chose to be 'unhappy' with that fact, even though he could have just ignored her like most normal reasonable normal people would do. Instead he chose to get angry, maybe at the anxiety of her pressing her horn, but again that's on him not her.

                          She never consistently pressed her horn or over did it. Her two horns were more than reasonable and rational, she was protecting her car. It's not rocket science. I guarantee you if he didn't get close to her car she wouldn't have horned- she had no reason to.

                          At the end of the day, he's the one that chose to get out of his car and threaten to break her neck. He needs help controlling his anger, there was nothing he did that was rational. If there was any rationality or reasonability to his actions I could understand, just like I can't see the rationality behind your impassioned defence. You're projecting.

                          • [Deactivated] on 07/11/2020 - 00:54
                            -2

                            @kanmen: maybe he didn't need the reminder? who knows. you weren't in the Jeep so you don't know whether he was looking at the screen or not. when she beeped the first time he still had more room to reverse so it can't have been that close.

                            i think most laws permit use of a horn in an emergency situation, it's debatable whether this was even an emergency. as i said before instead of wasting time beeping the horn she could have just reversed right away and not beeped anything.

                            you glaze over my observations and accuse me of projecting when you can't accept that there are solid facts that she was not completely innocent.

                            beeping a horn is often an aggressive act especially when she had already reversed and proceeded to do it a second time.

                            people get upset when abused in some form or another. a horn is a tool of abuse and she did use it.

                            it's sad you can't even see that and accuse me of being irrational.

                            do me a favour, next time you see someone with mental health issues yelling and screaming at someone (or themselves) film it and post it here. we can all make fun and blame them for everything.

                            especially women too, so we can try to destroy their lives over a little outburst as well.

    • kerfuffle on 06/11/2020 - 08:56
      +1

      am I missing something?

      Guy can't reverse a Jeep despite having more than enough space

      • [Deactivated] on 06/11/2020 - 09:06
        +2

        I could have reversed a Ram1500 in that space.

        • [Deactivated] on 06/11/2020 - 09:21
          -2

          nice brag. you drive a tank too?

          • whooah1979 on 06/11/2020 - 10:31
            +2

            @[Deactivated]: It's not difficult to reverse out. The drive got in then they can get out. All they need to do is to turn the steering wheel all the way.

            • [Deactivated] on 06/11/2020 - 11:22
              -3

              @whooah1979: if you think driving into a park and reversing out are the same thing then you really don't know about driving.

              as i mentioned above, he parked close to the pillar and he had to go in a single direction of travel which makes it much harder to start turning early without risking scratching your car on the pillar (not the same risk when driving into the parking spot).

              because of this his car was almost completely vertical across the lane so he had little room to move further to angle his car and it looks like he stuffed it up and the woman beeped a second time. she arrived late because she was speeding around the car park and came up suddenly (maybe she wanted the park). she did reverse after she realised he might need more room (after aggressively beeping at him), so this exchange continued.

              people don't drive well under both stressful (beeped at) and inattentive situations (phone call with kids) and that's how this escalated quickly.

              • whooah1979 on 06/11/2020 - 11:34
                +5

                @[Deactivated]: Driving a large SUV isn’t for everyone. The male driver may consider taking driving lessons or trade it in for a Mazda2 instead of wasting their time on frivolous litigation.

                • [Deactivated] on 06/11/2020 - 11:37

                  @whooah1979: yes, it's not for everyone and should be for no-one in city environments but they still sell like hot cakes and Jeeps in particular sell because the people that drive them are asshats.

                  there will be no litigation here and this will all fizzle away in a few days.

                  this garbage does the rounds all the time and it shouldn't even be reposted here.

              • petry on 06/11/2020 - 20:21

                @[Deactivated]: way 2 reasonable and thoughtful with insight your post mate - thats why you got negged,,,

          • capslock janitor on 06/11/2020 - 10:50

            @[Deactivated]: I drive a fork/lift 👁👄👁

          • eek on 06/11/2020 - 14:57
            +1

            @[Deactivated]: Tanks skid-steer so you could literally pivot on the spot.

  • mini2 on 06/11/2020 - 09:25

    If I was that bloke, I'd probably keep my mouth shut and don't fan the fire any more than that video being posted on DCOA. Now ended up on Sky is the complete opposite to what he was trying to do.

    I reckon this dashcam business isn't going away anytime soon, IIRC Audi/BMW have optional dashcams, Toyota recently joined this (saw their ads popped up on book of face) and of course who can forget Tesla have too many cams for trolling an idiot car thief…

  • Herbse on 06/11/2020 - 09:50

    News reporters, YouTube vloggers, highway patrol etc have been recording in public for years. Blocking out people's identity upon request is the only rule.

    But if the aim was to stop the spread of the video was the aim. They have failed gloriously.

  • OzHunterNSW on 06/11/2020 - 09:53
    -6

    You are quite within the law to record via dash cam… however, the moment you up-load to social media, and especially to single out an individual with "allegations" etc, then the law will come against you.

    • brendanm on 06/11/2020 - 10:52
      +11

      Please show the law that supports your claim.

    • UFO on 07/11/2020 - 13:57

      Allegations? What allegations?

      The guy made a fool of himself threatening to break the woman's neck. No editing, no further commentary… he did that all by himself.

      If the law is going after anyone, it's the guy making the threats. I'm not a lawyer, but his actions look a lot like assault to me. Completely uncalled for.

  • Emphasise on 06/11/2020 - 10:33

    Cop mate said by law you can record but only without audio. Although I'm not sure how heavily enforced this is.

    • whooah1979 on 06/11/2020 - 10:37
      +5

      You friend may need to brush up on their law skills.

    • John Kimble on 06/11/2020 - 10:45

      They are probably thinking about the Surveillance Devices Act, relating to "listening devices and private conversations"…which I don't think applies in this scenario (but I could be horrendously wrong).

      • Trance N Dance on 06/11/2020 - 19:16
        +3

        They probably were thinking about the Surveillance Devices Act. NSW is a two party consent state where all parties in the conversation must agree to the recording for it to be legal (unless it occurs in a place where privacy is not expected or to maintain the lawful interest of the covert recording party).

        It most likely doesn't apply in this scenario because:
        a. The audio recording isn't of the conversation per se but rather the interior of the car (if the male in question is shouting loud enough for the interior camera to pick up, there is no longer an expectation of privacy to the conversation)
        b. It occurred in a place where there is no expectation to privacy (public car park)
        c. The recorder was maintaining their lawful interest (evidence of a threat of violence, which under the Crimes Act 1900 of NSW is common assault)

  • Cluster on 06/11/2020 - 11:11
    +2

    I really despise people trying to cover up their own bad behaviour by threatening to sue the victim. Don't they realize it brings even more bad publicity for the lawyered up individual? I hope this video and the man involved gets even more attention now.

    • Luo18740 on 06/11/2020 - 12:06

      It's been sent to police so you would think that's enough evidence for him to be charged.

  • 91rs on 06/11/2020 - 12:13
    +2

    "My reason for posting it here, to make idiots like these"

    I will stop you right there, there are far too many idiots to educate and so many won't care for a word you or anyone else on the internet has to say about it.
    Why bother.

    • dazeet on 06/11/2020 - 15:00
      +4

      “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” — Edmund Burke

      • aspirepranesh on 06/11/2020 - 15:36
        +4

        Say what you want mate.

        Of course I wanted to out him. If it was a woman who had done the same, I would definitely want to out that person. FYI, I am middle aged guy who would never want to treat a woman, or any human being like that and wouldnt want anyone to treat my family or friends the same.

        FYI - I requested the mods for the name to be removed because you know why, I like to be reasonable.

        Its not like I recorded myself on video helping someone to post it online to get feedback to boost my ego. lol

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join