David70 wrote

I believe any camera that can potentially lead to someone's arrest where the police may try to get the video, whether on your car, house or business.

Sedan_Clan

Hadden14 wrote

Something something 4th amendment.

But, I guess if they are seizing footage from Ring doorbells this is not much different.

David70 wrote

I believe any camera that can potentially lead to someone's arrest where the police may try to get the video, whether on your car, house or business. I don't see how Tesla or any other system, aftermarket included wouldn't have the same issue. If you don't want to be part of it you better not have a camera recording anything in public.

As to this bothering me, I can't see a time where my car video might help in having a criminal arrested where I wouldn't help with providing the video.

Sedan_Clan wrote

This is a bit more nuanced.




That’s not exactly how it it works. Let me explain.

If somebody’s RING/MyQ/etc. cameras happen to record a crime, we conduct door knocks and ask/request to view the footage. The resident will decide to show/provide footage or they will decline (the latter occurs most often when they are scared of repercussions from gang members). We cannot force someone to provide the footage.

If somebody’s car is part of the crime scene and may contain relevant information, we can write a warrant and/or seize the car as evidence. Tesla camera systems with the proximity activation is very, very helpful. Conversely, Tesla’s also work against the owners as well, often revealing reckless driving behavior and/or proving who was at fault during a collision. It is a double-edged sword.

Required Legal Process
Ring does not disclose user information in response to government demands (i.e., legally valid and binding requests for information from law enforcement agencies such as search warrants, subpoenas and court orders) unless we're required to comply and it is properly served on us. Ring objects to legal requests it determines to be overbroad or inappropriate.

Can law enforcement bypass you and get your footage from the camera manufacturer?
Yes, if the video is stored in the cloud on the manufacturer’s servers, law enforcement can obtain it in one of two ways. First, it can obtain the footage with a binding legal order, such as a warrant or subpoena. Second, it can request the footage via an exception in the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) that allows manufacturers to share footage in the event of a potentially life-threatening emergency. If the footage is stored locally on the camera (in the camera’s internal memory or on an SD card), police may have to go to you to try to get it. For more information on the ECPA exception, see our story on how camera brands share footage with police without consent.

pikkagtr wrote

Stop it, I already am sold on never owning a toaster
You don't have to sell it to me

Sedan_Clan wrote

Conversely, Tesla’s also work against the owners as well, often revealing reckless driving behavior and/or proving who was at fault during a collision.

dradernh wrote

I've never considering owning a Tesla and haven't been aware of this feature.


However, I find this potential issue when owning a car with a camera that is always on to be a show-stopper. I suppose you can just turn it off (assuming it reliably obeys until reactivated) or just put a piece of painters tape over the lens. I don't know, my car is a 2017, which is now ancient by today's standards if the new car build options are any indication.

dreamingat30fps wrote

Tell me you know nothing about Tesla's without telling me you know nothing about Tesla's.

The footage is recorded to a usb drive. Remove or never install a usb drive (depending on model year) and it doesn't record anything.

Sedan_Clan wrote

David70


Read what I said. I was referring to the individual and the requirement they provide the footage to us on scene. I never said we couldn’t seek the footage from the company. We can subpoena a camera company the same way we do cellular phone companies. If the camera system footage is stored locally (..e.g. a hard drive within the home), we cannot gain access to it if the resident declines.


As an aside, I take the search warrant class in November, so I’m happy about that. No longer will I need a co-affiant in order to write a warrant. I’ll be able to write my own warrants.

2. Law enforcement can use a warrant to access home security devices

Another option police have to seize cam footage is via a warrant or similar court order. Warrants allow police to take home security devices and examine them, including any local storage that you have, so avoiding cloud storage won't help very much.

Sedan_Clan wrote

You’re missing the point. People who buy Tesla’s use that technology. It’s one of the major selling points. I have yet to run across a single Tesla driver who didn’t use it. In fact, they pride themselves on having footage of the incident and have produced footage on their phones to prove they did or didn’t do something. We have no less than 15 Tesla’s (…owned by my partners) parked in my station employee parking lot right now. All of them happy to demonstrate how sentry activation works.

dreamingat30fps wrote

The thread title is will this make you rethink buying a Tesla. Why is it specific to Tesla? Plenty of people buy dashcams, same thing just better integration on the Tesla.