From the Wikipedia article

> Inverse surveillance is a subset of sousveillance with a particular emphasis on the "watchful vigilance from underneath...

No. Sousveillance is possible without intent to observe the surveillance mechanisms in place. Go to a festival, these days, with the plethora of cameras (on phones or standalone, video or still) and people are participating in sousveillance (though likely not deliberately or recognizing it as such). They aren't watching the police or other observers. They're just particpating and recording the event itself.

cool. seems very ambiguous and watered down.

without intent seems like it should just be called "watching" or "recording". also does it stop being called "Sousveillance" if done on a plane? or hiking above a certain altitude?

we are very interested in pulling data from "accidental" surveillance.

> it should just be called "watching" or "recording". also does it stop being called "Sousveillance" if done on a plane? or hiking above a certain altitude?

or if it's done with a drone it's almost terrorism as many politicians would like you to believe. The concept of sousveilance can never be implemented in any meaningful democratic way on a day to day life because individuals are always subordinate to the state.