As domestic / residential CCTV is specifically exempt under section 36 of the DPA, you will not be able to register your use with the Information Commissioners Office; they just won't be interested.

Jon,

What if the home owner decides to store the images on a remote server rather than on equipment within their own home ?

Jon,

What if the home owner decides to store the images on a remote server rather than on equipment within their own home ?

i still wouldnt think it would make much difference as its still classed as domestic use not commercial

you could always email me persoanlly at

Moderated?

Jon,

What if the home owner decides to store the images on a remote server rather than on equipment within their own home ?

I do, all my system is backed up to a remote site not just my CCTV!

I've posted my question elsewhere to so I won't be posting again here. I can't understand why you are so strict on moderation! I simply don't want to publish any of my personal circumstances on open forum!

I can't understand why you are so strict on moderation!

well? it stops people or firms becoming members just to price for work

well? it stops people or firms becoming members just to price for work

I undertsand that part but I'm quite obviously not a company or in the trade! I came here for advice on a problem I have at home that I don't want to detail openly. So as I said I'll just go elsewhere and ask.

I undertsand that part but I'm quite obviously not a company or in the trade! I came here for advice on a problem I have at home that I don't want to detail openly. So as I said I'll just go elsewhere and ask.

understand but hows admin going to filter the public questions from the spam.

just post your info - it wont be anything we havnt heard before

I undertsand that part but I'm quite obviously not a company or in the trade! I came here for advice on a problem I have at home that I don't want to detail openly. So as I said I'll just go elsewhere and ask.

What you are is not obvious.

You could be anyone from anywhere.

As you point out this is a public forum.

You signed up to this forum of your own free will & by doing so you agreed you had read and would abide by our rules.

Site rules are for ALL & not up for discussion.

You are free to go where you like.

Any further posts attempting to or questioning the forum rules will be deleted.

C.

You are free to go where you like.

C.

yeah but he`s got us all wondering what he`s been upto now ............

yeah but he`s got us all wondering what he`s been upto now ............

Google is your friend...

But maybe not for some

Jon,

What if the home owner decides to store the images on a remote server rather than on equipment within their own home ?

Hi IP Alarms,

The DPA being a less than sophisticated piece of legislation, is not so much concerned with the issues of technology, but rather the purpose for which the data is gathered, and how that data is used.

As "residential" is outside the scope of this legislation, in a practical sense it makes no odds what technology is used by a homeowner, or why indeed they want to use it, the bottom line is that the DPA is completely ineffective at regulating the use of CCTV / IP Video in this environment.

What is particularly galling is that in theory, inappropriate use of video surveillance would be covered if the neighbouring property were an estate office (for example a commercial estate management use), but if it is the caretakers flat then it probably counts for nothing.

Time and again I'm asked about situations that would be controlled by the Act (for example exporting data to another country, such as an ISP with a server in a country outside the EU), but mention the words 'domestic' or 'residential', and the Commissioner just ain't bovvered!

Quite frankly, given the huge number of systems that are not DPA compliant, but should be, the lack of any tangible enforcement does tend to make something of a mockery of the whole situation.

That aside, without wishing to state the obvious here, Welung666 has made clear that for personal reasons he does not wish to post any information that he would feel uncomfortable divulging on a publicly viewable forum. Curiosity aside, IMHO that doesn't sound in the least bit unreasonable to me, and I really can't see any reason why anyone would have a problem in gracefully respecting his wishes