News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Facebook appeal in user tracki... by drngxn on Monday March 22, 2021 @09:13PM (#26549752)
> Does that mean Amazon was invited to the conversation? Should you as a visitor to the home expect that every logo you see in the house means that you agree to have that company present in your conversations during the visit

In short. Yes. Some states only require the _owner_ of the device to consent to being recorded. PDF download below

[1] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...

Re:U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Facebook appeal in user tracki... by jcrites on Monday March 22, 2021 @09:57PM (#26550095)
Some states only require the _owner_ of the device to consent to being recorded.

I hope that's the law everywhere (especially private property) or else security cameras could not exist be legal.

Re:U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Facebook appeal in user tracki... by kuschku on Tuesday March 23, 2021 @05:14AM (#26552726)
It's not. In e.g. Germany, security cameras may not film public areas, or anything outside of your own property (and also not private streets leading up to your mailbox).

Additionally, they must always be clearly labeled, clearly visible, and before getting into the range of them you'll have to have a visible sticker warning about them, and having a clear GDPR privacy policy as well as contact data for whom to contact to retrieve or delete the footage in case it might contain you.

Re:U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Facebook appeal in user tracki... by kube-system on Monday March 22, 2021 @10:04PM (#26550138)
I am fairly sure that some places do not, but consent is implicitly obtained through signage.
Re:U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs Facebook appeal in user tracki... by Mordisquitos on Tuesday March 23, 2021 @04:30AM (#26552455)
And heavily regulated signage at that, in terms of design, content, and visibility—not just anything that says something somewhere.