Hacker News Reader

Comment by downandout | Hacker News Reader

It is illegal to film someone without their knowledge in any area where they have an expectation of privacy. This is why, as mentioned in the article, Corvette owners were told not to use the valet video feature in their cars. As for the author's concerns about audio, it is even more restricted than video. So, I wouldn't be too worried about this...until a senator manages to work a law allowing rental car companies to do this into a random spending bill.

View on HN

Surely fine print on your rental agreement could let you know you could be filmed.

Indeed. Eventually it won't even be fine print. They will all do it, and you will have the choice of renting a car or not.

It's not even a question of there being a conspiracy, it's just a combination of incompetence and apathy. As an example of how easy your scenario is to achieve I received a letter from the courier division of the Norwegian postal service last Saturday. It asked me to complete a form and the form was this:

[ ] I agree to pay a fee (subject to change) and to pay the import tax on the package and on every other package ever.

[ ] Send my package back to the UK and I'll never receive anything ever again unless I agree to choice one the next time.

So, pay the fee and agree to the T&C or GTFO. Having already paid for the item and it keeping my car off the road I was left with no choice but to cough up the (extortion) fee.

This would still be problematic. What about the people that get into the car with you? They haven't agreed to anything.

Additional fine print. It is your responsibility for informing your guests that there is an active camera in the car.

Does it need to be a fine print? (why not something that's easy to see?) Here in New Zealand, some of our taxis have cameras. So even before entering the vehicle, it has "Under surveillance" or whatever on the windows, and additional stickers inside the car.

On that note though, I wonder if their cars will be much cheaper to rent than their competition to make consumers feel better about it.

Why can't Chevy put in some kind of "beep beep you are being recorded in valet mode" warning when the door is open and that mode is on. That would cover any reasonable case here.

Considering how many things are allowed to take pictures of you in your car (red light cameras, EZPass, ALL OTHER TRAFFIC CAMERAS) I'm going to go ahead and assume a judge would determine that a person in a car with windows and a windshield and whatnot has no reasonable expectation of privacy.

Unless the windows are illegally tinted, a driver's face should be visible from the front and sides of a car.

> any area where they have an expectation of privacy

Can you expect privacy in a box with clear windows?

You can expect privacy in your home through clear windows even if the shades are not drawn.

Really? I didn't know that. I thought anything that could be photographed or videotaped while standing on public access land is fair game.. i.e. if I stand on the sidewalk and take a photo of you inside your house.

This is generally true in the US, but you can't be using special equipment (e.g., super long tele lenses.)

Yes. So much, in fact, that having a gun in your car (in some states/situations) can be considered carrying a concealed weapon.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com