Ring Launches Standalone 'Neighbors' iOS App for Crowdsourcing and Preventing Criminal Activity

[B4U]

Well considering that the inside of someone’s home isn’t a public space, that would be quite true. However, intent would also come into account.

“However, if a camera points somewhere private (e.g., into someone's bedroom window) then there may be a privacy concern. While the camera is situated outside, it cannot generally be oriented in a manner intended to invade an area where someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy.”

https://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=35154

Obviously I can’t setup a camera that specifically and intentionally tries to record the inside of your home. However, if someone’s doorbell or floodlight camera happens to coincidentally have their across-the-street neighbor’s living room in part of the frame, which is practically a guarantee for a large number of such cameras, then that would seem to be perfectly fine.

I’d also like to see the details of the case you’re referencing, because at face value, it doesn’t seem to have much to do with the discussion here.

The reference you used stated the following:
"While the camera is situated outside, it cannot generally be oriented in a manner intended to invade an area where someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy. That is especially true if the camera has enhanced capabilities that allow it to see through obstructions or in the dark."
Note that it stated "in the dark". Given that the camera has night vision, I am not sure if it is acceptable.
Note: a human eye has an ISO of 800. (https://wolfcrow.com/blog/notes-by-dr-optoglass-sensitivity-and-iso-of-the-human-eye/)
Although I do not know how high is the ISO for the doorbell's camera (they do not list it), it is clear that it would be way more than what the human eyes are capable of based on looking at the pictures alone.

Additionally, it stated again and again the importance of "reasonable expectation of privacy". That definition is not very well defined and is going to be based upon each individual, where I would expect privacy at my own porch and not getting recorded by someone in the neighborhood without my permission because it is technically not "in the street".

Hence I said that is a very slippery slope for privacy.

On the other hand, the case I was referencing - The man naked inside his own home was aquitted of indecent exposure.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/07/va-man-acquitted-flashing-passers-home.html

 

[vipergts2207]

The reference you used stated the following:
"While the camera is situated outside, it cannot generally be oriented in a manner intended to invade an area where someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy. That is especially true if the camera has enhanced capabilities that allow it to see through obstructions or in the dark."
Note that it stated "in the dark". Given that the camera has night vision, I am not sure if it is acceptable.
Note: a human eye has an ISO of 800. (https://wolfcrow.com/blog/notes-by-dr-optoglass-sensitivity-and-iso-of-the-human-eye/)
Although I do not know how high is the ISO for the doorbell's camera (they do not list it), it is clear that it would be way more than what the human eyes are capable of based on looking at the pictures alone.

Additionally, it stated again and again the importance of "reasonable expectation of privacy". That definition is not very well defined and is going to be based upon each individual, where I would expect privacy at my own porch and not getting recorded by someone in the neighborhood without my permission because it is technically not "in the street".

Hence I said that is a very slippery slope for privacy.

On the other hand, the case I was referencing - The man naked inside his own home was aquitted of indecent exposure.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/07/va-man-acquitted-flashing-passers-home.html

In the end it would come down to court cases, and no reasonable judge would rule that someone with a Ring doorbell installed, was intentionally infringing upon someone else’s right to privacy because they’re home happened to be in the frame. Otherwise the argument could be made that any video recording of someone’s home where windows are in any frame are an invasion of someone’s expectation of privacy. Obviously an absurd proposition. Better not record your kid’s first bike ride, might accidentally get a neighbor’s window in the shot. Realtors’ pictures of neighbors’ homes at the edge of the frame on Zillow? Google street view? Clearly incidental views of the inside of someone’s home are quite acceptable, as is the case when someone uses a Ring for their security camera.

And what does a guy being acquitted of being naked in his own home have to do with any of this? You know that a person’s right to be naked in their own home and another person’s right to have a security camera that may incidentally record someone’s window are not in any way mutually exclusive right?

 

[Batmanii]

But, is it Homekit compatible? lol

Over 2 years late on that promised feature, but they keep bringing out relatively worthless features like this one.

They need to adjust their priorities, or refund the extra $50 we paid for the Ring Pro immediately.

 

[WinstonRumfoord]

I can imagine these people alerting neighbors that there’s a black guy or a Hispanic family walking around the neighborhood just going about their business. Do you know all your neighbors on your street? No, so why would you assume they’re not your neighbors !! This thing is so wrong on multiple levels… typical of the “guilty until proven innocent “ mentality this country fell into.

You must not live in a dense urban environment. This past year alone, we have had 2 packages stolen in different incidents, our garage broken into and all our bikes and thousands in tools stolen, as well as our cars being rifled through multiple times and insurance documents being stolen. Since Jan 1.

I welcome any technology that helps neighbors look out for each other. And yes, I know the name and face of every single person on our block.

 

[TheFluffyDuck]

Paranoid people uploading footage of people they deem suspicious to other paranoid people. What could possibly go wrong?

 

[imola.zhp]

Bye-bye privacy… is this like a Big Brother in your front yard? And law enforcement couldn’t care less about your packages being stolen from your porch anyway. As to communicating crime, they already do through opt-in into their warning system.

I can imagine these people alerting neighbors that there’s a black guy or a Hispanic family walking around the neighborhood just going about their business. Do you know all your neighbors on your street? No, so why would you assume they’re not your neighbors !! This thing is so wrong on multiple levels… typical of the “guilty until proven innocent “ mentality this country fell into.

What an awful comment, this is borderline race-baiting. That is not the intended use for the app, your comment about big brother in your front yard? How about big brother in your pocket all the time? If a camera "could" record anything at anytime and share it in the background you could argue that the microphone on your mobile phone could do the same thing, or any listening device.

Back on topic, I have had suspicious sales people ring my doorbell. Even with a sign next to it that says "no soliciting." We have a few different trucks that come to our area with either a bed full of mulch or a trailer with mulch on it, I refer to them as "mulch scammers." I send out the alert on Nextdoor when they bother our home. At this point we just lie to them and say we are renters, it is the easiest way to get rid of them. A friend of mine fell for it a few years back, they say you need X number of 5-gallon buckets of mulch at $Y per bucket. They then proceed to put 2X number of buckets on your flower beds and demand twice the money. They only want to be paid in cash and likely do not have liability insurance. The other sales people are contractors of ATT trying to sell us fiber internet, no thanks, we are happy with cable, and again, there is a no-soliciting sign next to the doorbell.

EDIT: I've also shared suspicious activity from my floodlight cam in the back of the house, two cars raced past, one turned around on the grass of a neighboring house, then someone got out of the other car and sat in the first car that turned around. No idea, but our alleyway dead-ends a few houses past us and those vehicles do not live in the area. One might speculate they just picked something up off of a porch and were in the car opening it to see what they had stolen. A few minutes later they both raced out of the area. Another time, someone stopped and peeked in the neighbor behind us's back yard. It was not my neighbor, I guess they were looking to see if anything looked appetizing. That gate is usually locked but was not that day.

 

[Bromeo]

Just to put things into perspective - the Neighborhoods function / app is an opt-in way to post security concerns within your neighborhood, optionally attaching saved video (not live - not even possible). My neighborhood posts alerts/videos of package thefts, strangers going door-to-door, car prowls, etc. Occasionally the comments get a little out-there like Mrs. Kravitz's character on the old Bewiltched TV series (look it up if you don't know the reference). However, I will say the quality of posts on Neighborhoods is better than what I've seen on NextDoor, which seems to easily fan the flames of paranoia (that said, I do find ND helpful for free-cycling items I no longer have a use for that would otherwise be hard to donate). Perhaps having the "proof in the pudding" with the video upload encourages some introspection before posting about the latest suspicious person and trying to make more of it than it is.

As to the bigger issue of recording audio/video on your property, that is more of a philosophical one. I've been using security cameras for years and have found them helpful. I recently added a Ring Doorbell 2 just to see what it was all about and whether I would recommend it to my non-techie friends/family. In short, it's great, and does what it promises. However,

I have reservations for my own usage to have it record audio/video clips when the PIR sensor detects motion on my front porch. That includes recording our own conversations enjoying sitting out there over a glass of wine. That those recordings go up to a third-party cloud out of my control is a bit, well, weird. I have made it a habit to delete old recordings on a daily basis. I'd like to have a "privacy" feature to temporarily disable not just motion alerts, but recordings for an evening of chilling on the porch. And personally, I'd rather not even be presented with recordings of quiet conversations my friends/family might have out of my earshot. Ignorance is bliss, sometimes!

 

[C DM]

Just to put things into perspective - the Neighborhoods function / app is an opt-in way to post security concerns within your neighborhood, optionally attaching saved video (not live - not even possible). My neighborhood posts alerts/videos of package thefts, strangers going door-to-door, car prowls, etc. Occasionally the comments get a little out-there like Mrs. Kravitz's character on the old Bewiltched TV series (look it up if you don't know the reference). However, I will say the quality of posts on Neighborhoods is better than what I've seen on NextDoor, which seems to easily fan the flames of paranoia (that said, I do find ND helpful for free-cycling items I no longer have a use for that would otherwise be hard to donate). Perhaps having the "proof in the pudding" with the video upload encourages some introspection before posting about the latest suspicious person and trying to make more of it than it is.

As to the bigger issue of recording audio/video on your property, that is more of a philosophical one. I've been using security cameras for years and have found them helpful. I recently added a Ring Doorbell 2 just to see what it was all about and whether I would recommend it to my non-techie friends/family. In short, it's great, and does what it promises. However,

I have reservations for my own usage to have it record audio/video clips when the PIR sensor detects motion on my front porch. That includes recording our own conversations enjoying sitting out there over a glass of wine. That those recordings go up to a third-party cloud out of my control is a bit, well, weird. I have made it a habit to delete old recordings on a daily basis. I'd like to have a "privacy" feature to temporarily disable not just motion alerts, but recordings for an evening of chilling on the porch. And personally, I'd rather not even be presented with recordings of quiet conversations my friends/family might have out of my earshot. Ignorance is bliss, sometimes!

Doesn't disabling motion alerts (and ring alerts) also essentially disable recordings as well given that there wouldn't be anything to trigger those recordings?

 

[ActionableMango]

Have you privacy people actually seen videos from these things?

They use wide angle lens (fisheye) cameras in an attempt to have as much coverage as possible, which makes everything super tiny and distorted. The only way you could identify someone is if they were within a few feet of the camera.

At any appreciable distance, even just across the street, it is literally impossible to identify someone. I've seen my neighbor's 1080p HD video of his boat being stolen (parked on the street in front of his house). You can't make out any license plate number, and you can't even make out the skin color or gender of the people stealing his boat.

By the time the distance includes crossing the street and a yard to a porch where you are hugging your wife or whatever, it's going to be vaguely possible to see that there are two human beings, and that they might be hugging, and even only that under good conditions.

In the following picture, look at the doorway across the street--it's like 30 pixels tall. And on top of that, doors are larger than people. You'd be lucky to tell the difference between a hugging and a mugging:

Here's another picture under absolutely ideal conditions. Mid-day, bright sun, clear visibility. If there were kids playing on the lawn across the street, they would be nothing more than little blob-like specks:

 

[C DM]

Have any of you people actually seen videos from these things?

They use wide angle lens (fisheye) cameras in an attempt to have as much coverage as possible, which makes everything super tiny and distorted. The only way you could identify someone is if they were within a few feet of the camera.

At any appreciable distance, even just across the street, it is literally impossible to identify someone. I've seen my neighbor's 1080p HD video of his boat being stolen (parked on the street in front of his house). You can't make out any license plate number, and you can't even make out the skin color or gender of the people stealing his boat.

By the time the distance includes crossing the street and a yard to a porch where you are hugging your wife or whatever, it's going to be vaguely possible to see that there are two human beings, and that they might be hugging, and even only that under good conditions. Look at the doorway across the street--it's like 30 pixels tall, and doors are larger than people.

Here's another picture under absolutely ideal conditions. Mid-day, bright sun, clear visibility. Kids playing on the lawn across the street are going to be little blob-like specks.

There's still some sort of information that you can get in plenty of instances that can be more useful than no information at all.

 

[ActionableMango]

There's still some sort of information that you can get in plenty of instances that can be more useful than no information at all.

Yes, I agree with you. And it is a deterrence too, which may discourage theft in the first place.

I mostly meant to speak out to the "invasion of privacy" people, so I used their "hugging wife" and "kids in front yard" examples.

 

[B4U]

In the end it would come down to court cases, and no reasonable judge would rule that someone with a Ring doorbell installed, was intentionally infringing upon someone else’s right to privacy because they’re home happened to be in the frame. Otherwise the argument could be made that any video recording of someone’s home where windows are in any frame are an invasion of someone’s expectation of privacy. Obviously an absurd proposition. Better not record your kid’s first bike ride, might accidentally get a neighbor’s window in the shot. Realtors’ pictures of neighbors’ homes at the edge of the frame on Zillow? Google street view? Clearly incidental views of the inside of someone’s home are quite acceptable, as is the case when someone uses a Ring for their security camera.

And what does a guy being acquitted of being naked in his own home have to do with any of this? You know that a person’s right to be naked in their own home and another person’s right to have a security camera that may incidentally record someone’s window are not in any way mutually exclusive right?

At the end, we are not going to agree on the issue. Since you find it acceptable to have your neighbor looking at you and recording 24/7 while you and your house is in their plain view, meanwhile I find it absurd that I can't let my guard down even at the comfort of my own darn home whether inside or out, knowing that some creeps may be looking at and constantly recording whatever the heck I am doing at my place AND share it with others without my permission.
(Google street view does blur out people, mind you.)
And I don't even want to get started on talking about the worse scenario where they got hacked and started to record on their own...

 

[vipergts2207]

At the end, we are not going to agree on the issue. Since you find it acceptable to have your neighbor looking at you and recording 24/7 while you and your house is in their plain view, meanwhile I find it absurd that I can't let my guard down even at the comfort of my own darn home whether inside or out, knowing that some creeps may be looking at and constantly recording whatever the heck I am doing at my place AND share it with others without my permission.
(Google street view does blur out people, mind you.)
And I don't even want to get started on talking about the worse scenario where they got hacked and started to record on their own...

Dude, they’re called blinds...

And if you want to get fancy, they make these things called curtains.

 

[B4U]

Dude, they’re called blinds...

And if you want to get fancy, they make these things called curtains.

Why exactly do I have to make my own house into a dark room because of some creeps peeping at my place?
That is like blaming the rape victim of dressing too exposed.

 

[vipergts2207]

Why exactly do I have to make my own house into a dark room because of some creeps peeping at my place?
That is like blaming the rape victim of dressing too exposed.

It’s called physics, and glass allows light to pass through in both directions. Of course, unless you do something like mirror one side. Maybe that’s what you should do since you’re concerned to such a ridiculous degree about what people can see inside your home.

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Gila-3-ft-x-15-ft-Mirror-Privacy-Window-Film-PRS361/100196546

There is more than one simple solution out there if you’re truely that concerned, but I doubt that you really are. More likely you just want to complain about what is essentially a non-issue.

I walk around my house in my underwear all the time at home. You know what I do then? Adjust the blinds so they still let light in, but obscure the view enough that it would be unlikely that anyone outside would notice I’m in my underwear. If you’re comfortable enough allowing passers-by to see what you’re doing in your home, then you better be comfortable enough to know that it might perhaps be recorded as well.

FYI, and this may be a revelation to you, but nobody cares about you enough to install a doorbell to spy on you.

Btw, comparing yourself to a rape victim in this situation is abhorrent and absurd.

 

[Weaselboy]

Doesn't disabling motion alerts (and ring alerts) also essentially disable recordings as well given that there wouldn't be anything to trigger those recordings?

With the current Ring software there is no way to stop it from recording. When you disable alerts, it just stops it from sending the alert, but it still records. This is a downfall of the Ring IMO. When I work out in my front yard for 45 minutes it sends recording after recording up to the Ring cloud and I have no way to stop it (at least that I have found).

 

[C DM]

With the current Ring software there is no way to stop it from recording. When you disable alerts, it just stops it from sending the alert, but it still records. This is a downfall of the Ring IMO. When I work out in my front yard for 45 minutes it sends recording after recording up to the Ring cloud and I have no way to stop it (at least that I have found).

Good to know. I guess I would have expected recordings not to happen if the alerts are basically disabled (given that the alerts are what should trigger the recordings).

 

[ActionableMango]

I walk around my house in my underwear all the time

Pix or it didn't happen.


Actually, don't.