Security and Law
Security and Law
Research Question?
Are private security cameras invading the right to privacy. + OWN HOME SURVEILANCE
Focus Jurisdiction?
Queensland
Comparison Jurisdictions
Western Australia
Northern Territory
South Australia
New South Wales
Victoria
Tasmania
Australian Capital Territory
Specifics
Recording areas in which the reasonable person would have the expectation of privacy.
Relevant Legislation
Commonwealth Legislation
The Australian Privacy Act 1988
The Australian Constitution
The Criminal Code
It is an offence for you to video record people without their consent, in places where they would expect to be private, such as a bedroom or bathroom. Section 227A of theCriminal Codemakes this a criminal offence.
Surveillance Devices Act 2004
Queensland Law Reform Commission
Review of Queenslands laws relating to civil surveillance and the protection of privacy in the context of current and emerging technologies
wsOther
chapter 13 of the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (which regulates the use of surveillance devices by police) and chapter 3 part 6 of the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (which regulates the use of surveillance devices by an authorised officer of the Crime
Universal declaration of human rights
State legislation
Previous Lawsuits
Torts?
Current Civil Proceedings?
Definitions
How to approach task
Introduce topic
Introduce self
Introduce topic (Security cameras versus the right to privacy)
Rights as a Neighbour vs Tennent
Introduce security element
Introduce the need for privacy
What rights/laws are infringed?
Are there any current or past legal cases?
Urbanization & increase in products.
Introduce Legislation (Security)
Discuss state commonwealth legislation
What does the cth protect more in laws cameras or publics privacy
Legislation on government/business surveillance camera placement and fields of view
Legislation on a member of the publics surveillance camera placement and fields of view
Are members of the public affected by these laws?
+
Homesecurity Insecurity?
Introduce Legislation (Privacy)
What levels of privacy does the average Australian expect
What legislations affect privacy
What use of cameras infringe on privacy
What can the public do to protect their privacy
Sharing of a recording deem able as private?
Introduce (Foreign examples)
America, UK, Europe?
Critical analysis of Australias standpoint?
RESEARCH PAPER
Dear students,
That might be a structure to adopt for your research paper. Again, on obligation to strictly follow :-)
Introduction: This section will introduce the topic to be considered in the context of a research paper
Literature review: This section sets up the theoretical background of discussion. What other scholars argue about this topic or aspects of this topic.
Main body: This section provides justifications that strengthens the paper argument. Justifications should be also supported from related examples. Consequently, the examples empower the argumentation and provides a more sophisticated analysis.
Conclusions/ Recommendations: This section adds value to the literature. Provides a recommendation or list of recommendations to be followed or implemented with potential to improve the discussed regulatory framework (if applicable) or/ and improve policies attached to the issue considered in the paper.
Kind regards,
Dr. Nikos KoutrasUnit Coordinator
SOURCES AND INFORMATION
https://www.alrc.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/final_report_123_whole_report.pdfSerious invasion of privacy tort recommendations
Reasonable expectation of privacy
Serious Invasions of Privacy in the Digital Era ALRC Report No 123 (2014)
lawreform.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/Publications/Reports/Report-120.pdf
Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd (2001) 208 CLR 199, [42] (Gleeson CJ).
5.27 An activity is not private simply because it is not done in public, nor because it occurs on private property; rather, it has such measure of protection from the public gaze as the characteristics of the property, the nature of the activity, the locality, and the disposition of the property owner combine to afford.211
https://www.qlrc.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/591766/qlrc-wp-no-77.pdfA number of reviews have recommended, proposed or considered the introduction of a general statutory tort or cause of action for serious invasions of privacy, but none has been enacted:
ALRC Report No 123 (2014) pt 2;
Australian Government Issues Paper: Serious Invasion of Privacy (2011) 16 ff;
Eyes in the Sky report (2014) Rec 3;
Eyes in the Sky Report: Government Response (2016) 8;
NSWLRC Report No 120 (2009);
NSW Parliamentary Committee Report (2016) Rec 3;
VLRC Report No 18 (2010) Recs 2224.
8 February 2022
In itssubmissionto the review of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (Privacy Act), the Law Council has expressed support for the development of a statutory tort of serious invasion of privacy.
https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/privacy-in-your-state#:~:text=The%20Office%20of%20the%20Australian,Act%201988%20(Privacy%20Act).
The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) mainly deals with issues that are covered by thePrivacy Act 1988(Privacy Act). The Privacy Act is a federal law which does not cover local, state or territory government agencies, except the Norfolk Island administration.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzbK8fl7JOURight to complain to the government agency that breached privacy But what agency since none cover.
https://www.qhrc.qld.gov.au/your-rights/human-rights-law/right-to-privacy-and-reputation#:~:text=This%20right%20protects%20the%20privacy,is%20limited%20to%20unlawful%20attacks.
This right protects the privacy of people in Queensland from unlawful or arbitrary interference. Arbitrary interference includes when something is lawful, but also unreasonable, unnecessary or disproportionate.
Section 25 of theHuman Rights Act 2019says that:
A person has the right not to have the persons privacy, family, home or correspondence unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with; and
not to have the persons reputation unlawfully attacked.
https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/your-privacy-rights/surveillance-and-monitoring/security-cameras
If the Privacy Act 1988 (Privacy Act) covers the organisation or agency, then anypersonal informationthey collect through a surveillance device must comply with theAustralian Privacy Principles. The Privacy Act covers Australian Government agencies and organisations with an annual turnover of more than $3 million, andsome other organisations. Such an organisation or agency must:
tell you that your image may be captured before youre recorded
make sure recorded personal information is secure and destroyed or de-identified when it is no longer needed
Residential security cameras
If your neighbour has a security camera pointed at your house and youre worried about your privacy, first try to talk to your neighbour. If this doesnt fix the problem, you could ask your local community justice or neighbourhood mediation centre for help (see the table below).
The Privacy Act doesnt cover a security camera operated by an individual acting in a private capacity, but state or territory laws may apply. For more information, contact the Attorney-Generals Department in your state or territory. However, if youre concerned about your safety, contact the police.
You could also contact your local council to find out if the practice contravenes any local laws. Some councils require planning permission for security cameras.
If your property is part of a strata title, check the by-laws to see if they cover installing or using security cameras.
https://www.qld.gov.au/community/caring-child/foster-kinship-care/information-for-carers/everyday-caring/safety/household-surveillance-devices
Recordings must be kept securely and the information recorded by the surveillance device must only be used for the purpose for which it was intended, or as required by, or permitted, under the law.
https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/simple-village-house-background_8825411.htm#query=cartoon%20house&position=1&from_view=keyword
https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/illustration/aerial-cartoon-suburban-neighborhood-royalty-free-illustration/110872816
https://www.nellyssecurity.com/blog/concerned-about-privacy-heres-what-to-do-if-your-neighbors-security-camera-is-pointed-at-your-houseAsk to see your neighbors camera feeds:If youre concerned about the position of your neighbors security cameras, you can always ask to see their camera feeds. This way youll be able to see exactly what your neighbor is recording. It could be that your home or your yard is not as prominently displayed as you thought.
Ask your neighbor to reposition their camera:If you look at their feeds and are still concerned with what theyre able to see, you can always ask that they reposition their camera to feature less of your property. This is totally up to your neighbor, as they are not breaking the law (assuming theyre not recording inside your house). However, if you explain to your neighbor why youre uncomfortable, they may be more inclined to honor your request.
Ask your neighbor to add privacy masks:Most security cameras have a feature called Privacy Masks which allows the user to black out certain portions of their security camera feeds. If your neighbors camera has this function, ask them to overlay a privacy mask on top of your home to block your property from their cameras view.
Ask your neighbor to remove motion detection alerts for your property:Your neighbor may be recording their footage 24/7 or they may only be recording based on motion detection. If its the latter, you can always ask your neighbor to edit their cameras motion detection field so that theyre only recording motion on their own property. This way, you can rest assured that your neighbor isnt recording your movement on your own property.
https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/domestic-cctv-systems-guidance-for-people-using-cctv/U.K.
If you set up your system so it captures only images within the boundary of your private domestic property (including your garden), then the data protection laws will not apply to you.
But what if your system captures images of people outside the boundary of your private domestic property for example, in neighbours homes or gardens, shared spaces, or on a public footpath or a street?
Then the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA18) will apply to you, and you will need to ensure your use of CCTV complies with these laws. This guidance refers to them as the data protection laws.
Regardless of whether your use of CCTV falls within the data protection laws, the ICO recommends you use it responsibly to protect the privacy of others.
What does private domestic property mean?
It means the boundary of the property (including the garden) where you live.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62Ys_BOr9tMHome security cameras beaming to strangers around world | A Current Affair
https://www.qlrc.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/591766/qlrc-wp-no-77.pdfReview of Queenslands laws relating to civil surveillance and the protection of privacy in the context of current and emerging technologies
[1.8] chapter 13 of the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (which regulates the use of surveillance devices by police) and chapter 3 part 6 of the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (which regulates the use of surveillance devices by an authorised officer of the Crime and Corruption Commission) are outside the scope of the review
[1.11] There have been a number of recent law reform reviews and other inquiries which, relevantly to this review, have considered surveillance regulation in Australia. [1.12] A brief overview of those reviews and inquiries is contained in Appendix D.
[2.2] Privacy may be described in a general way as the interests a person has in controlling what others know about them, in being left alone and in being free from interference or intrusion. 9
9 See, eg, International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP), What does privacy mean? (2018) .[2.3] The Oxford English Dictionary defines privacy as:11 The state or condition of being alone, undisturbed, or free from public attention, as a matter of choice or right; seclusion; freedom from interference or intrusion.
[2.7] Individual privacy is comprised of many related and overlapping interests or dimensions. Most commonly, these are identified as:19
Privacy of the person or bodily privacythe interest in freedom from interference with an individuals physical person and bodily integrity, including from direct and indirect physical intrusions. It may also include psychological intrusion.20
Privacy of personal space or territorial privacythe interest in limiting intrusion into personal spaces, including in the home, workplace and in public. This concerns a persons sense of personal safety and dignity as well as their property rights.
Privacy of personal communications or communications and surveillance privacythe interest in freedom from interference with personal communications, including interception, recording, monitoring or surveillance.
Privacy of personal information or information/data privacythe interest in controlling access to, use and disclosure of information about the person, including images and information derived from analysis of other data.21
[2.8] Other privacy interests include:
Privacy of personal behaviour or behavioural privacythe interest in freedom from undue observation of or interference with a persons activities, movements, associations and preferences, including sensitive matters such as sexual preferences, political activities and religious practices.22
Privacy of personal experiencereferring to concerns about the storage and use of collected data about an individuals personal experiences, including what they read and view and who they interact and associate with.23
Locational privacy or tracking privacythe interest in controlling the extent to which information about a persons current or past location(s) is accessed and used by others.24
Privacy of thoughts and feelingsthe interest a person has in not sharing their thoughts or feelings and not having them revealed to others.25
Privacy of attentionthe ability to exclude intrusions that force a person to direct attention to them, rather than to matters of their own choosing.26
Privacy through anonymitythe interest in choosing to be and remain anonymous, for example, when entering into transactions with organisations.27
[2.9] A right to privacy is recognised under international human rights law, in the Human Rights Bill 2018 and in the human rights statutes of some other jurisdictions.28
[2.10] Privacy is recognised as a fundamental value that underpins human dignity in many activities, such as:29
meaningful and satisfying interpersonal relationships, including intimate and family relationships;
freedom of speech, thought and self-expression;
freedom of movement and association; engagement in the democratic process;
freedom to engage in secure financial transactions;
freedom to pursue intellectual, cultural, artistic, property and physical interests; and
freedom from undue interference or harm by others.
[2.12] An expectation of privacy is a core element of modern liberal democracy. It derives from the liberal notion of a personal (or private) sphere in which individuals, as long as they do not harm others, are free to act without government interference.32 Accordingly, it has been said that:33
[2.13] A reasonable expectation of privacy is the critical measure used to determine the acceptable limits of actions, such as surveillance, that might infringe upon privacy, including in public places. Whether an expectation of privacy is reasonable in the circumstances is likely to depend on factors such as:34
location (for example, a public park and a public bathroom would be associated with different expectations, and there would also be different expectations for private places, such as a persons home);
if surveillance is used:
whether the person is notified of, or consents to, the use of the surveillance;
the purpose of the surveillance;
whether the surveillance used is appropriate in the circumstances (for example, a business may require visual but not audio surveillance)
[2.17] Relevantly, the ALRC nominated the following three guiding principles for privacy reform:40
Privacy is a fundamental value worthy of legal protection.
There is a public interest in protecting privacy.
Privacy should be balanced with other important interests
[2.23] In considering reforms to surveillance devices legislation, a number of law reform commissions and other government bodies have examined the meaning of surveillance. They each considered that surveillance involves the deliberate monitoring of a person, a group of people, a place or an object for some purpose, usually to obtain certain information about the person who is the subject of the surveillance. It may occur on a single occasion or be a systematic activity.49
Listening or audio surveillancelistening to or recording sounds, usually conversations. This may be done with the assistance of aids to enhance human hearing, such as directional microphones, voice recorders or bugs. It may also include intercepting communications, such as phone conversations or voice communications over the internet.
Optical or visual surveillancewatching a person or place. It may be undertaken with the assistance of aids to enhance human vision, such as telescopes or infra-red binoculars. It may also include the use of devices that can record or stream images, such as cameras, video recorders or CCTV.
Tracking or location surveillancethe observation or recording of a targets location. Location data may capture the location of a person or object at a point in time or monitor a persons movements in real-time. It may also involve predictive tracking or retrospective tracking, based on the data trail of a persons movements. Examples of location and tracking devices include global positioning system (GPS) and satellite technology tracking, radio frequency identification (RFID), and automatic number plate recognition (ANPR).
[2.27] Surveillance technologies have become increasingly sophisticated, with advanced capabilities and internet connectivity. At the same time, they are becoming smaller, less expensive, more accessible and widely available.54 It is anticipated that surveillance devices will become increasingly autonomous, intelligent and connected in the future, and that the trend towards convergence will continue.55
[2.30] Surveillance devices include technologies or devices that are developed
specifically for surveillance purposes, as well as those that are capable of being used
for surveillance.
[2.31] A smartphone is an obvious example of an everyday device that is capable
of being used as a surveillance device because of its camera and video and audio
recording capabilities, GPS and location tracking software, and internet connectivity.
[2.32] Drones are another example of an emerging technology capable of being
used for surveillance, as they provide new capabilities for recording images, videos
and sounds.63 The AAUS and Liberty Victoria observed that:64
It is only in recent years that unmanned systems [drones] have started to fall
within the reach of individual consumers from a financial, logistical and
technological perspective. Just years ago, a small unmanned system would have
cost thousands of dollars; today, for less than $250 Australian consumers can
purchase an unmanned system featuring a high-definition camera, microphone
and ultrasound altimeter, that can be remotely controlled via a mobile phone or
tablet. As the technology continues to mature and prices continue to decrease,
these systems are likely to proliferate.
[2.33] Aerial drones are already used in a variety of civilian applications. For
example, drones are being used in the arts for cinematography and photography, by
real estate agents to take aerial photographs of properties, by lifeguards to patrol
beaches, by farmers to monitor crops and livestock, by government agencies to
survey lands and conduct building and infrastructure inspections, and by scientists
to monitor habitats and wildlife populations or tidal and weather patterns.65
Privacy implications of surveillance technologies
[2.37] Civil surveillance technologies are used for a range of legitimate purposes.69 It is also possible, however, for surveillance technologies to be used for improper and harmful purposes such as theft, stalking, harassment, bullying, peeping or prying.
[2.38] Whatever the purpose, surveillance technologies have the potential to impact on individual privacy.70
70 See generally, Mills, above n 8, 29 ff. See also, eg, R Clarke, Managing Drones Privacy and Civil Liberties Impacts (Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd, 21 July 2014) ; Ziegeldorf, Morchon and Wehrle, above n 62, [4].
[2.43] The affordability and accessibility of surveillance technologies also allows for the decentralised and more widespread use of surveillance. Surveillance technologies are increasingly accessible to private individuals, groups and businesses. For example, 88% of Australians now own a smartphone74 and CASA has estimated there are more than 100 000 privately operated drones in Australia,75 many of which may carry surveillance devices. Surveillance has also become more common in public and quasi-public places. For example, the proportion of local councils in Australia that have or plan to have open street CCTV increased from one in ten in 2005 to more than two thirds in 2015.76
[2.46] These features combine to increase the scope for surveillance technologies to be used in ways that challenge community expectations and understandings of privacy. In particular, they may impact on what is considered a reasonable expectation of privacy.77 [2.47] Particular privacy risks include:78
Intrusivenesswhere surveillance is of activities or in locations that carry a high expectation of privacy, or where the type of surveillance is considered disproportionate to its purpose.
Intensitywhere individuals are subject to surveillance for longer periods, more closely and in higher resolution.
Extensivenesswhere, due to increased accessibility of surveillance technologies, surveillance occurs more often and in more places.
Lack of transparency and consentwhere individuals are not made aware that they are under surveillance, are not able to provide meaningful consent, or do not understand how their information will be used.
Over-collectionwhere surveillance generates more information than is necessary for its purpose, such as inadvertently capturing information about bystanders.
Function creepwhere information collected for one purpose is later used for another purpose which may not have initially been anticipated.
Inaccuracywhere information collected from surveillance is used to draw conclusions about a person or their behaviour that may be incorrect or misleading.
[2.48] A related concern is data insecurity, where information that is being collected or stored is vulnerable to unauthorised disclosure.79
[2.51] Legislation regulating the use of surveillance devices is one means of protecting against risks to privacy and, in so doing, assisting in maintaining reasonable expectations of privacy within the community, particularly as the public becomes increasingly accustomed to being watched.83
83 NSWLRC Report No 108 (2005) [4.20]
Community attitudes about privacy and surveillance
[2.52] Community attitudes about privacy and surveillance are complex. Overall, Australian research shows an ongoing community concern for privacy.84 It has also been observed that privacy is increasingly becoming an asset.85
[2.57] For example, the most recent national survey conducted for the Privacy Commissioner of New Zealand found that 55% of respondents are more concerned with their individual privacy than they were in the last few years. Of particular interest, the survey found that over 62% of respondents are concerned with the use of drones in residential areas, and 36% are concerned about the use of CCTV by individuals.90
Surveillance devices legislation
Queensland: Invasion of Privacy Act 1971
[2.62] In Queensland, the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 regulates listening devices.
Section 4 of the Act defines listening device to mean:
any instrument, apparatus, equipment or device capable of being used to
overhear, record, monitor or listen to a private conversation simultaneously with
its taking place.[2.65] It is an offence for a person to use a listening device to overhear, record, monitor or listen to a private conversation unless that person is a party to the conversation (the use prohibition).98 Use by a party without the consent of the other partiesreferred to as participant monitoringis therefore permitted.99
[2.67] There are also prohibitions on communicating or publishing information (the communication or publication prohibitions):
Other jurisdictions
[2.70] Like Queensland, the surveillance devices legislation in the Australian Capital Territory and Tasmania regulates the use of listening devices in relation to private conversations.107
[2.71] In contrast, the surveillance devices legislation in New South Wales, the Northern Territory, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia regulates surveillance devices. In those jurisdictions, surveillance devices legislation initially regulated the use of listening devices only but was later extended to cover additional categories of surveillance device.108
[2.72] A surveillance device is defined to mean a listening device, optical surveillance device, tracking device and, except in Western Australia, data surveillance device.109 Listening device is defined in similar terms to the legislation in Queensland.110 The other categories of surveillance device are defined as follows:111
Optical surveillance deviceany instrument, apparatus, equipment or device that can be used to monitor, record visually or observe an activity, excluding spectacles, contact lenses or a similar device used by a person to overcome a vision impairment. In South Australia, the term is more specifically defined to also include observing or recording visually a person, place or activity and to also exclude telescopes, binoculars or other similar devices.
Tracking deviceany instrument, apparatus, equipment or device (or, in New South Wales, the Northern Territory and Victoria, an electronic device) that can be used to determine or monitor the geographical location of a person or an object (or, in Victoria, the primary purpose of which is to determine the geographical location of a person or an object).
Data surveillance deviceany instrument, apparatus, equipment or device (and, in New South Wales and South Australia, a program) that can be used to monitor or record the input of information into or output of information from a computer (or the information that is being put onto or retrieved from a computer).112 This does not include an optical surveillance device. In South
[2.73] The legislation in New South Wales, the Northern Territory, South Australia
and Victoria also defines a surveillance device to mean a combination of any two or
more of those devices, and enables other kinds of devices to be prescribed by
regulation.114
[2.74] The regulation of each category of surveillance device is subject to various
limitations. In particular:
a listening deviceis regulated in each jurisdiction only to the extent that it is
used in relation to a private conversation (similar to Queensland).
an optical surveillance deviceis regulated: only in relation to a private activity (in the Northern Territory, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia), which does not include an activity carried on outside a building (in Victoria);115
in New South Wales and South Australia, only where the use of the device is on or in premises, a vehicle or other thing and (in New South Wales) only if it involves entry on to or into the premises or vehicle, or interference with the vehicle or other object, without consent.116
[2.75] The regulation of a listening device and, except in New South Wales, an optical surveillance device is linked to the concept of a private conversation or a private activity. Consistently with the legislation in Queensland,121 these concepts are defined as follows:122
private conversationa conversation between parties (or words spoken by one person to others) carried on in circumstances that may reasonably be taken to indicate that one or all of the parties want the words to be heard or listened to only by themselves (or only by themselves and some other person); and
private activityan activity carried on in circumstances that may reasonably be taken to indicate that one or all of the parties do not want the activity to be observed, except by themselves.123 [2.76] reasonably to expect that the conversation might be overheard or the activity observed.124
[2.80] The surveillance devices legislation in each jurisdiction also includes communication or publication prohibitions. Like Queensland, jurisdictions where the legislation is limited to a listening device include separate offences that apply to a party and to another person.131 Other jurisdictions include more general offence provisions that apply to any user of a relevant surveillance device.132 The provisions vary in their application to information that was obtained through the lawful or unlawful use of a device.
Surveillance and law enforcement in Queensland
[2.82] In Queensland, chapter 13 of the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (the PPRA) separately regulates the use of a listening device, optical surveillance device, data surveillance device or tracking device by law enforcement officers.133 The Surveillance Devices Act 2004 (Cth) regulates the use of those devices by federal law enforcement officers.
[2.84] The Surveillance Devices Act 2004 (Cth) and chapter 13 of the PPRA are based on model legislation which was developed to achieve uniform regulation of the use of surveillance devices by law enforcement agencies in Australian jurisdictions and provide for the mutual recognition of warrants, in order to facilitate cross-border investigations.135
^
[2.85] The model legislation was implemented in Queensland by the insertion of
chapter 13 of the PPRA.137 Other jurisdictions, such as New South Wales, have
enacted a single Act, based on the model legislation, which regulates the use of a
surveillance device by both individuals and law enforcement officers.138
Other laws relevant to surveillance and privacy
Right to privacy
[2.100] In Queensland, the Human Rights Bill 2018 includes a provision to protect and promote human rights and build a culture in the Queensland public sector that respects and promotes human rights. The Bill requires public entities to act in a way that is compatible with human rights.166
[2.101] The Bill proposes a right to privacy and reputation, under which individuals have a right not to have their privacy, family, home or correspondence unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with, and not to have their reputation unlawfully attacked.167 This right may be subject only to reasonable and justifiable limits.168
[2.104] In Queensland, the Information Privacy Act 2009 (the IP Act) regulates the way in which Queensland government agencies (for example, Ministers, departments, local governments and public authorities)171 collect, store, use or disclose personal information.
[2.112] Similar to Queensland legislation, the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) regulates the way in which certain entities collect or hold personal information.181
Criminal offences
[2.117] In Queensland, some serious breaches of privacy are recognised by the criminal law. Observations or recordings in breach of privacy
[2.118] Section 227A of the Criminal Code contains two separate offences about observing or recording a person in breach of their privacy
[2.123] The Criminal Code (Non-consensual Sharing of Intimate Images) Amendment Bill 2018 proposes to amend the Criminal Code to insert two new offences dealing with intimate images and prohibited visual recordings.192
Other offences
[2.129] The offence of unlawful stalking in chapter 33A of the Criminal Code can involve watching a person, watching a place where a person lives, works or visits or following a person.198 The conduct must be intentionally directed at a person, and can be conduct that is engaged in on one protracted occasion or on multiple occasions.199 The commission of this offence could involve the use of surveillance devices.
[2.130] It is an offence to take an indecent photograph or record, by means of any device, an indecent visual image of a child under 16 years of age.200
[2.132] The use of surveillance might also involve trespass. At present, the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 includes specific provision making it an offence to enter a dwelling house without the consent of the owner or occupier,202 or to gain entry by force, threats, intimidation, deceit or fraudulent means,203 unless the entry was authorised, justified or excused by law or was made to protect the house or a person inside.204 General offences of trespass apply under the Summary Offences Act 2005 and the Criminal Code.205
Common law
[2.134] An individual who has a right to exclusive occupation of land or premises may bring an action in trespass where there is an intrusion onto property.206 It has been suggested that an intrusion into the airspace above land if it is at a height that is potentially necessary for the ordinary use and enjoyment of the occupier might constitute a trespass.207 It has also been suggested that, as a physical interference with land or airspace is required, this action will not apply to a person who merely follows or watches or keeps a person under surveillance without any threat, or who remains outside the land to carry out surveillance.208
[2.135] An owner or occupier of land209 is entitled to the quiet use and enjoyment of that land, and a person who substantially and unreasonably interferes with that entitlement may be liable in nuisance.210 It has been suggested that an unreasonable interference may relevantly include keeping the occupier under surveillance, or positioning cameras or lights in situations where they interfere with, record or snoop on the occupiers activities.211
Guidelines about surveillance
[2.137] Where a listening device or an optical surveillance device is not used in
connection with a private conversation or activity, that use is generally not regulated
by surveillance devices legislation. This might include, for example, the use of CCTV
cameras on a street or in business premises for the purpose of security or community
safety.216
Part 3: Issues for consideration
[3.2] There are gaps, inconsistencies and uncertainties in the current regulation
of surveillance devices, and of privacy more generally.219[3.3] In Queensland, in particular, the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 is outdated and limited in its scope.220 The Act restricts the use of listening devices to overhear, record, monitor or listen to private conversations. However, it does not prohibit or restrict the use of optical surveillance devices, data surveillance devices, tracking devices or other surveillance devices.
[3.4] The shortcomings of the Act strongly suggest that a more comprehensive legislative response to the modern techniques of surveillance is required, both as to the range of devices and technologies that should be regulated and the range of activities that should be protected as private.
[3.5] In 2014, a Commonwealth Parliamentary Committee conducting an inquiry into drones reported that the range and complexity of laws relevant to surveillance and privacy creates uncertainty as to the scope of the law and its ability to cope with current technology, and that the lack of clarity may make it difficult for people to make a complaint and obtain adequate redress when they believe their privacy has been invaded. It was noted in particular that the increasing use and capability of technology such as drones increases the likelihood that there will be breaches of privacy.221
[3.6] The other laws of relevance to surveillance and privacy that apply in Queensland are inadequate. They are fragmented and, in some instances, apply differently to individuals and corporations
. [3.7] Existing State and Commonwealth information privacy legislation applies in limited circumstances and does not generally protect the privacy of individuals against surveillance. In particular, the Acts collectively:
apply only to the collection and use of personal information;222
apply primarily to government agencies and a limited class of other entities;223
do not apply to all businesses, or to individuals acting in a private capacity;224 and
offer individuals a right to complain but not a right of action for a privacy breachin general terms, although steps are to be taken within organisations to address a privacy issue, individuals whose privacy is breached will not ordinarily receive compensation or other similar remedy.225
[3.8] Criminal offences that may apply where a person breaches another persons privacy apply only in particular circumstances. Further, they operate to punish conduct after it occurs and do not regulate or prohibit the use of a surveillance device that may be relevant to such conduct.
[3.9] Whilst there are some common law actions that might indirectly protect a persons privacy, they are not intended to specifically address breaches of privacy and only provide piecemeal, limited protection.226
[3.10] In most other Australian jurisdictions, surveillance devices legislation has been modernised and, in particular, has been updated to include regulation of optical surveillance devices, data surveillance devices and tracking devices.227
[3.11] Considering the gaps, inconsistencies, and uncertainties in the current legal framework in Queensland, the Commission considers that a new legislative framework to protect the privacy of individuals in the context of the use of civil surveillance devices and technologies is necessary.
[3.12] The legislation should be sufficiently broad in its scope to regulate existing and emerging surveillance technologies and strike a balance between the interests in the use of surveillance and the privacy rights and interests of individuals who may be harmed or affected if surveillance is unreasonably intrusive.228
Scope of a new legislative framework
[3.15] A challenge for the legislation is the recognition that expectations of privacy will differ depending on the context.231
[3.17] However, limiting the scope of legislation to a private conversation or activity might exclude from protection other information about which an individual also holds a reasonable expectation of privacy. This includes the location of a person or their property
Surveillance in public places
[3.20] The dividing line between public and private places is not always clear, but it is apparent that it gives rise to different expectations of privacy.238 This is a matter of degree: it is reasonable for a person to expect a high degree of privacy, especially from outsiders, inside their home and to some extent within their backyards, but less so on the street outside their home; they might also expect a high level of privacy when using a public bathroom but less so when they are walking through a public park or shopping centre.
Surveillance conducted covertly
[3.23] A related consideration is the extent to which the legislation might need to distinguish between overt and covert surveillance.240 For example, the NSWLRCs proposed legislative scheme provided for different levels of oversight and regulation on the basis of this distinction, including a set of legislative principles to govern overt surveillance.241 [3.24] By its nature, covert surveillance involves a significant intrusion on an individuals privacy. Reasonable expectations of privacy may depend, in part, on the extent to which surveillance is conducted openly or in secret; covert surveillance is likely to attract much greater concern, even in situations in which surveillance might otherwise be tolerated.
Surveillance should ordinarily be done with consent
[3.27] Legislation usually treats surveillance and the collection of personal information about an individual as an infringement of the persons privacy unless the person consents to it.242 As a general principle, surveillance should ordinarily be permitted if it occurs with consent. This is consistent with the approach in other jurisdictions.243
[3.28] However, notions of consentwhen it is considered valid, when it can be implied, the extent to which it should be informedare challenged in an environment in which emerging technologies are adopted at a rapid pace and traditional methods for obtaining consent are not easily applied in practice. For example, how does one ensure that footage of a person captured by a remotely piloted drone is obtained with consent, or that consent is obtained for surveillance of a large group of people?
Approaches to defining surveillance devices
[3.29] Finally, a fundamental question for the review is what approach should be taken to defining surveillance devices.
Recognised categories approach
[3.30] As explained above, the current approach of surveillance devices legislation in other jurisdictions is to regulate recognised categories of surveillance devices (that is, a listening device, optical surveillance device, tracking device or data surveillance device).244 [3.31] These categories are defined by reference to their general function or capability (for example, a device that can be used to listen, record, record visually, monitor or observe).
Alternative technology neutral approaches
[3.33] Several law reform commissions and other bodies have noted that it is desirable for surveillance devices legislation to be technology neutral or non-device specific, in order to keep pace with current and emerging technologies.250
[3.35] The NSWLRC considered that surveillance and the use of a surveillance device defies technical limitations and precise delineations. In its view, any attempt to regulate surveillance through legislation limited to a few devices would inevitably be ineffectual. Instead, the NSWLRC recommended that surveillance device should be defined broadly, to mean:253 Any instrument, apparatus or equipment used either alone, or in conjunction with other equipment, which is being used to conduct surveillance.
[3.36] It also recommended that:254 The [legislation] should define surveillance as the use of a surveillance device in circumstances where there is a deliberate intention to monitor a person, a group of people, a place or an object for the purpose of obtaining information about a person who is the subject of surveillance. The [legislation] should define monitor (as used in the definition of surveillance) as listening to, watching, recording, or collecting (or enhancing the ability to listen to, watch, record or collect) words, images, signals, data, movement, behaviour or activity.
[3.37] The NSWLRC recognised that those definitions are circular.255 It also recognised that this approach would have the effect of capturing all activity that meets those broad definitions, unless specifically excluded.256 It explained that [t]he important factor will be whether the use of any device amounts to surveillance as defined by the legislation.257
[3.39] The ALRC also considered that surveillance devices legislation should be technology neutral, so that it can more readily be applied to any existing or emerging technology that could be used for surveillance.259 However, the ALRC did not recommend particular technology neutral definitions. It considered that the surveillance devices legislation should, at least, define surveillance device to include the types of devices recognised under existing laws; that is, a listening device, optical surveillance device, tracking device or data surveillance device. It also considered that the legislation should apply to technologies that may be considered to fall outside the ordinary meaning of device, such as software or networked systems.260
[3.40] The ALRC noted that, given this approach, the offences would need to be appropriately tailored so that:261 an offence would only be made out where the particular use of the device is inappropriate.
[3.43] It has long been recognised that privacy needs continually shift in the face of changing technologies.267 Any area of regulation affected by technological developments will face the difficulty of dealing with a moving target. Legislation cannot predict all changes and will invariably require revision and updating.
[3.44] The recommendations made by the NSWLRC and the ALRC that a technology neutral approach be adopted were not included in draft legislation and have not been implemented.
[3.45] Where jurisdictions have reformed their surveillance devices legislation, the existing recognised categories approach has been retained, with improvements to expand the range of categories beyond listening devices and to modernise other aspects of the legislation.268 This approach was also recommended in the recent ACT Review.269
[3.52] The Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 does not define use. In some other jurisdictions the legislation states that use of a surveillance device includes use of the device to record a conversation or other activity, but does not otherwise define the term.278
[3.53] The ordinary meaning of use is broad and often variable, but relevantly includes putting something into action or service, or carrying out a purpose or action by means of a particular thing.279
Intention or knowledge
[3.58] The use prohibition in other jurisdictions usually includes a mental element of knowledge or intent.
[3.59] In some instances, a person is prohibited from knowingly installing, using, maintaining or attaching a device for a particular purpose,282 or for a particular purpose without appropriate consent.283
[3.60] In other instances, a person is prohibited from using a device with the intention of acting in a way that is prohibited.284 Alternatively, some legislation states that a prohibition will not apply where a persons actions were unintentional.285 In Queensland, the use prohibition does not apply to the unintentional hearing of a private conversation by means of a telephone.286
[3.61] The addition of a mental element such as knowledge or intent limits the prohibition to deliberate conduct and adds to the difficulties of proof of the commission of the offence.
Exemptions
Use of a surveillance device with consent
[3.66] In most jurisdictions, the use of a surveillance device with consent is usually permitted. In most instances, this refers to the consent of the parties to a conversation or activity, or the person who is subject to the surveillance. In a few instances, the consent of another person, such as the owner of relevant premises, is required.
[3.67] Consent may be express or implied,290 but is not otherwise defined in surveillance devices legislation.
[3.69] In the ACT Review, it was considered that consent should be clearly established. It was recommended that consent should require that the person is adequately informed, provides consent that is current and specific, acts voluntarily and has the capacity to understand and communicate their consent.292
[3.87] It has been argued, in particular, that for something to be a criminal offence there must be a clear public interest involved:313 Reasonable expectations do not, of themselves, create such a public interest. The [right] of a person to make such recordings at present is a substantive legal right. There is no convincing reason given as to why this right is less important than the interest of the other individuals in controlling the mode of recording a particular event in which he or she is a participant.
[3.88] On the other hand, a number of arguments have been made against participant monitoring: one of the purposes of surveillance devices legislation is to offer protection to individuals, including protection of their privacypermitting the recording of a private conversation or activity without the knowledge or consent of those recorded would undermine that purpose, and would be inconsistent with a general expectation that monitoring will not occur without consent;314
participant monitoring is no more acceptable than covert surveillance by a third party, and is no less severe a breach of privacywhether participant monitoring is justified should be determined according to the circumstances, rather than whether the person conducting the monitoring was a party;315
participant monitoring may have a chilling effect that discourages people from speaking freely or participating in some activities;316
participant monitoring is not equivalent to note taking and requires greater control, particularly because the latter cannot be done covertly, is less compelling and accurate, and has less potential for distribution;317
permitting participant monitoring but restricting the disclosure of information obtained may be insufficient because:318 a recording remains vulnerable to use or dissemination; the exceptions under which publication or communication may be permitted are broad; and surveillance itself may cause harm to a person, for example, stress and emotional harm, insecurity and loss of trust, and a desensitisation to surveillance, leading to a narrowing of peoples reasonable expectations of privacy; and
participant monitoring places the monitoring party at an unfair advantage because they can modify and control their behaviour based upon the knowledge that the conversation is being recorded.319
[3.98] The Commission considers that the proposed legislative framework in Queensland should not include a general exception for participant monitoring.
[3.101] The Invasion of Privacy Act 1971which applies only to a listening device and permits participant monitoringnow offers insufficient regulation and protection of privacy. Permitting an individual to engage in participant monitoring, in circumstances where a surveillance device is easily accessible and a recording can be quickly, easily and widely disseminated, is a significant intrusion into individual privacy.
Protecting and individuals lawful intrests[3.108] For example, if A and B are having a private conversation they are both principal parties. If A considers that it is in his or her lawful interests, A may record the conversation without the knowledge or consent of B. If C is permitted to listen to that conversation, C could record the conversation with As consent and to protect As lawful interests without the knowledge or consent of B.
Unintentional use of a surveillance device
[3.148] In some jurisdictions, a person does not commit an offence if they unintentionally hear a private conversation by means of a listening device388 or if the use of an optical surveillance device results in the unintentional recording or observation of a private activity.389 In Queensland, this exception is limited to the unintentional hearing of a private conversation by means of a telephone.390
[3.151] In the ACT Review, it was observed in particular that the use of drones by individuals may result in the inadvertent observation of private activities, and concluded that a prohibition on surveillance should exclude inadvertent observation.393
Use of a surveillance device in other prescribed circumstances
[3.153] In several jurisdictions, the surveillance devices legislation provides that it is not an offence to install, use, maintain or attach a device in prescribed circumstances. In South Australia, circumstances may be prescribed in relation to any of the four categories of surveillance device,395 but in the Northern Territory and Western Australia this is limited to a tracking device.396
[3.154] In relation to a tracking device, prescribed circumstances include:397
to search for a person or thing during a search and rescue operation;
to monitor the location of a hospital or nursing home patient in particular circumstances, for example, if a patient is legally obliged to stay but is likely to attempt to leave, or to locate a vulnerable patient if they become lost or go missing;
to monitor the activities and location of an accused person, offender or prisoner, or to locate a prisoner if they escape from legal custody;
to monitor the location of an animal or thing the subject of a research project;
to measure transport system performance or monitor traffic; or
to track an object that is believed to have been stolen.
Communication or publication of a private conversation unlawfully listened to
3.159] First, section 44(1) of the Act provides that it is an offence for a person to communicate or publish to another person a private conversation, or a report of, or of the substance, meaning or purport of, a private conversation that has come to their knowledge as a result, directly or indirectly, of the unlawful use of a listening device. [3.160] This offence does not apply:400 if the communication or publication is made: to a party to the conversation or with the consent, express or implied, of such a party; or in the course of proceedings for an offence against part 4 of the Act; or to prevent a person from communicating or publishing knowledge of a private conversation that was not obtained through the unlawful use of a listening device, even if that person also obtained knowledge of the conversation through the unlawful use of a listening device.
Communication or publication of a private conversation by a party
[3.161] Second, section 45(1) of the Act provides that it is an offence for a party to a private conversation who used a listening device to overhear, record, monitor or listen to that conversation, to subsequently communicate or publish to another person any record of the conversation made, directly or indirectly, by the use of the listening device.401 [3.162] This offence does not apply where the communication or publication is:402
made to another party to the private conversation;
made with the express or implied consent of all other parties to the private conversation who were speaking or spoken to during the conversation;
made in the course of legal proceedings;
not more than is reasonably necessary: in the public interest; or in the performance of a duty of the person making the communication or publication; or for the protection of that persons lawful interests;
made to a person who has, or is believed on reasonable grounds to have, such an interest in the private conversation as to make the communication or publication reasonable under the circumstances in which it is made; or
in general terms, made by a person who used the listening device in connection with law enforcement.
Other jurisdictions
[3.163] The surveillance devices legislation in the Australian Capital Territory and Tasmania includes similar offence provisions to those in Queensland.403
[3.164] In contrast, the surveillance devices legislation in the Northern Territory, Victoria and Western Australia contains a single offence provision, with several exceptions. Generally, a person is prohibited from communicating or publishing a record or report of a private conversation or private activity, which is known about, or which the person knows has been made, as a direct or indirect result of the use of a listening device, an optical surveillance device or, except for Western Australia, atracking device.404 These offences apply in relation to both lawful and unlawful use of those devices.405
[3.165] The surveillance devices legislation in New South Wales contains a similar offence provision, except that it is limited to the communication or publication of information about a private conversation or the carrying on of an activity, which is known about (directly or indirectly) through the unlawful use of a listening device, an optical surveillance device or a tracking device.406 It also contains a separate offence provision, which prohibits a person from communicating or publishing information regarding the input of information into, or the output of information from, a computer, obtained from the unlawful use of a data surveillance device.407
[3.166] In South Australia, it is an offence for a person to communicate or publish information or material derived from the unlawful use of a surveillance device.408 It is also an offence for a person to communicate or publish information or material derived from the use of a listening device or an optical surveillance device in circumstances where the device was lawfully used to protect the lawful interests of that person, or in the public interest.409
Exceptions: where a communication or publication is permitted
Communication or publication to a party, or with consent of parties
[3.169] In Queensland, it is not an offence for a person to communicate or publish information about a private conversation obtained through the unlawful use of a listening device if the communication or publication is made to a party to the conversation or with the consent, express or implied, of such a party.414 It is also not an offence for a party to a private conversation to communicate or publish information obtained through the use of a listening device if it is made to another party to the private conversation, or with the consent of all other persons by or to whom words are spoken in the course of the private conversation.415
Communication or publication in the course of legal proceedings
[3.172] The communication or publication prohibitions in surveillance devices legislation apply to communication or publication to a court.419 However, in each jurisdiction, such communication or publication is permitted in the course of some, or all, legal proceedings.420
Communication or publication to protect a persons lawful interests
[3.177] In Queensland, it is not an offence for a party who has used a listening device to communicate or publish a record of a private conversation if that communication or publication is not more than is reasonably necessary for the protection of the lawful interests of that person.428
Communication or publication by a private investigator or loss adjuster
[3.181] In South Australia, a licensed investigation agent or loss adjuster must not knowingly communicate or publish information derived from the lawful use of a listening device or optical surveillance device, except to a prescribed person or class of persons, in prescribed circumstances, or as authorised under the Act or any other Act or law. 436
[3.182] For a licensed investigation agent:437
prescribed persons or classes of persons include the clients or employers of the licensed investigation agent and the legal representatives and medical practitioners of those clients or employers
Communication or publication in the public interest
[3.185] The legislation in Queensland, the Northern Territory and Victoria contains a broad public interest exception.440
[3.186] In Queensland, a party who has used a listening device will not commit an offence by communicating or publishing a record of a private conversation if that communication or publication is not more than is reasonably necessary in the public interest.441
[3.188] The public interest exception may, for example, apply in relation to a media organisation, journalist, private investigator or loss adjuster.443
[3.190] The requirement for judicial oversight in these circumstances:445 ensures that the privacy of the public is maintained not only at the time of surveillance, but also after any surveillance recording has been made.
[3.192] The exceptions for a media organisation were included following opposition to an earlier Bill that required, as a blanket rule, an order of a Supreme Court Judge prior to any communication or publication of information obtained from the use of a relevant surveillance device in the public interest.447
[3.194] The NSWLRC considered that an open-ended public interest exception in relation to covert surveillance would be too broad, would be open to abuse and would offer insufficient privacy safeguards:448
Where definitions of public interest have been attempted, they have necessarily been vague and wide-ranging, and would potentially encompass any type of situation. The Commission is of the view that, because public interest is such a nebulous concept, surveillance legislation which contained a broad exception without requiring approval by an issuing authority would operate so broadly that it would not operate as a proper curb on unwarranted intrusions into personal privacy. The public interest in preventing illegality, protecting legitimate rights and interests or providing the public with information does not and should not automatically take precedence over privacy concerns in every situation. Covert surveillance may sometimes be justified in circumstances which involve the public interest. Covert surveillance will, however, always be a breach of privacy. Introducing a broad public interest exception with no approval process into surveillance legislation would have the effect of condoning covert surveillance in all cases where the person or organisation conducting the surveillance believes there to be a public interest involved, regardless of the privacy ramifications. (note omitted)
Communication or publication to a person with a reasonable interest in the circumstances [3.202] In Queensland, it is not an offence for a party who has used a listening device to communicate or publish a record of a private conversation to a person who has, or who the party believes on reasonable grounds to have, such an interest in the private conversation as to make the communication or publication reasonable under the circumstances in which it is made.458
[3.203] Similar provision is made in the surveillance devices legislation in the Australian Capital Territory, and Tasmania.459
[3.204] In Western Australia, it is a general requirement of any defence of communication or publication that it is made to a person who has, or is believed on reasonable grounds by the person making the publication or communication to have, such an interest in the private conversation or activity as to make the communication or publication reasonable under the circumstances in which it is made.460
Admissibility of evidence obtained from surveillance device
[3.207] In Queensland, the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 expressly provides that a person who has knowledge of a private conversation as a direct or indirect result of the unlawful use of a listening device may not give evidence of that conversation in any civil or criminal proceedings.464 That evidence is only admissible where:465
a party to the conversation consents to the person giving evidence; the person giving evidence has obtained knowledge of the conversation in the way described and also in some other way; or
the evidence is given in proceedings for an offence against the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 that is constituted by a contravention of, or failure to comply with, any provision in the part of the Act about listening devices.466
Penalties and remedies
Criminal penalties
[3.215] The Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 contains a number of prohibitions, as discussed above. These are framed as criminal offences. [3.216] The use prohibition and the communication or publication prohibitions are indictable offences. The maximum prescribed penalty for those offences is 40 penalty units ($5222) or 2 years imprisonment.478
[3.217] Charges and convictions for those offences are relatively infrequent.479
[3.218] Other offences against the Act are punishable on summary conviction480 and attract a lesser maximum penalty ranging from 10 penalty units ($1305.50) to 30 penalty units ($3916.50) or 18 months imprisonment.481 These offences are subject to a limitation period of 12 months from the commission of the alleged offence or 6 months after the commission of the alleged offence comes to the complainants knowledge, whichever is the later.482
[3.219] The position is similar in other jurisdictionsthe surveillance devices legislation in each of the other Australian states and territories and in New Zealand imposes criminal sanctions for breaches of the legislation.
Civil penalties
[3.223] An alternative regulatory option for deterring and punishing breaches of the law is to provide for civil penalties, as opposed to (or in addition to) criminal sanctions.
[3.227] The main distinction between civil penalties and criminal penalties is the difference in the procedures by which they are enforced, as highlighted below:
[3.229] The VLRC recommended the inclusion of civil penalties as an alternative to criminal penalties in the surveillance devices legislation, with the proposed regulator having the power to commence civil penalty proceedings.
The commission has only been able to find evidence of four successful prosecutions for breach of the [Surveillance Devices Act 1999 (Vic)] since its inception on 1 January 2000. All cases concerned the unlawful use of optical surveillance devices in particularly offensive circumstances. One explanation for the small number [of] prosecutions may be that the criminal sanctions in the [Act] are too severe for use in cases where the wrongful behaviour is not highly offensive. the introduction of a civil penalty regime for existing offences in the [Act] would allow a surveillance regulator to act on the less serious matters that come to his or her attention without referring the matter to Victoria Police. Introducing civil penalties is also likely
Forfeiture orders
[3.240] In addition to criminal offences, the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 provides for the forfeiture of a listening device used in breach of the Act.
[3.241] If the court convicts a person of an offence against the use prohibition, the court may, by the conviction, order that the listening device be forfeited to the State and delivered by the person with possession of the device within the time and to the person specified in the order (a forfeiture order).501
[3.242] If the person does not comply, police are empowered to seize the listening device.502
[3.243] With the exception of Victoria, the surveillance devices legislation in the other Australian states and territories also provides for the court to make forfeiture orders upon conviction for an offence.503 In some jurisdictions, the court may also order the forfeiture or destruction of the record made by the device.
Other prohibitions
[3.247] The surveillance devices legislation in some jurisdictions includes a small number of other ancillary prohibitions.506
[3.248] These include provisions that, variously, make it an offence to:
possess a record of a private conversation knowing that it was obtained, directly or indirectly, from use of a surveillance device in breach of the legislation;507
possess a surveillance device knowing that it is intended or mainly designed for use in breach of the legislation, or with the intention of using it, or it being used, in breach of the legislation;508
Civil remedies
[3.259] Penalties are generally designed to punish and deter wrongful conduct. In contrast, civil remedies are generally intended to compensate for the harm caused by the conduct to an individual. Whereas penalties are imposed by the State, civil remedies are traditionally pursued by the individual.522
[3.260] Civil remedies commonly include orders for monetary compensation (often called awards of damages), orders to either restrain or require particular action (sometimes called injunctions), and declarations (for example, about the lawfulness of a persons conduct).523 [3.261] Ordinarily, civil orders are enforceable through separate proceedings.524 In some cases, the relevant legislation may also provide that breach of an order is a criminal offencethis applies, for example, to non-monetary orders of QCAT, peace and good behaviour orders and domestic and family violence orders.525
[3.263] The Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 does not provide for any civil remedies for a breach of the Act. However, it includes the following saving provision:527
51 Saving of remedies No proceedings or conviction for any offence against this Act shall affect any civil right or remedy to which any person aggrieved by the offence may be entitled.
[3.264] As discussed at [2.133] to [2.136] above, various civil remedies might be available to someone whose private conversations or activities have been the subject of surveillance, but these apply in a limited range of circumstances. The financial assistance scheme provided for in the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 2009 is also limited in its application.528
[3.265] There are no civil remedy provisions in the surveillance devices legislation of the other Australian states and territories.
[3.266] However, specific provision for civil remedies is made in the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (Cth).
[3.276] Provision for civil remedies is also made, in differing terms, in the telecommunications interception legislation in some other jurisdictions. For example, Canada, the legislation empowers the court that convicts a person of a relevant offence to order up to $5000 in punitive damages to the aggrieved person.538
[3.278] The ALRC noted that the surveillance devices legislation of the states and territories provides important privacy protections by creating offences for the unauthorised use of surveillance devices.540 It considered that federal legislation should replace the existing state and territory statutes, and that it should empower a court to order remedial relief, including compensation, for a person subjected to unlawful surveillance.541 In making this recommendation, the ALRC explained that:542
If surveillance legislation were enacted by the Commonwealth, there would be merit in both surveillance legislation and the [Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (Cth)] providing similar options for compensation and redress. Criminal law generally punishes the offender without necessarily providing redress to the victim. While an individual who has been subjected to unlawful surveillance may gain some satisfaction from seeing the offender fined, and while the fine may dissuade the offender and others from conducting further unlawful surveillance in the future, the victim will generally not receive any compensation or other personal remedy.
[3.279] The ALRC observed that an approach similar to that taken under the Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 1995 (Cth) would provide a quicker, cheaper and easier means of redress than a general statutory tort for serious invasions of privacy because it would not require the individual to pursue separate civil proceedings in addition to the prosecution for the offence.543
[3.280] The ALRC also observed that, although statutory compensation schemes for victims of crime exist in the states and territories, those schemes are generally only available for serious physical crimes such as assault, robbery, or sexual assault, and surveillance is therefore unlikely to give rise to compensation under these schemes.544
Enforcement and regulatory powers
Police and prosecution
[3.286] The regulatory and compliance mechanism of the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 is primarily criminal, relying on police investigation and prosecution of offences.
[3.287] The position is similar in the other jurisdictions. In two jurisdictions, the surveillance devices legislation expressly requires the consent of either the Attorney General550 or the Director of Public Prosecutions551 to institute proceedings for an offence.
Independent regulator
[3.289] A feature of some regulatory regimes that aim to support best practices in industry or agency dealings with members of the community is an independent regulator with specified oversight functions and powers. This applies, for example, under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), the IP Act and the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991.
[3.290] Reviews in some other jurisdictions have proposed that surveillance devices legislation should also have an independent regulator.553
[3.291] This could provide a lower cost and less formal avenue for dealing with possible breaches, or an avenue for research, public awareness, expert advice and guidance. On the other hand, the introduction of an independent regulator would involve additional costs, with a potential increase in regulatory burden.
[3.294] In Queensland, the Information Commissioner, supported by the Privacy Commissioner, has a range of functions under the IP Act, including management and mediation of privacy complaints against Queensland government agencies, monitoring and reporting on agency compliance, and education and training.556
[3.295] As explained at [2.104] above, the IP Act applies only to personal information handled by Queensland government agencies. Accordingly, it presently has a limited application to surveillance activities. The Information Commissioner has released guidelines under the IP Act for government agencies about privacy and the use of camera surveillance or drones.557
[3.296] The Human Rights Bill 2018which provides for a right to privacy and reputation558proposes to rename the Anti-Discrimination Commission Queensland as the Queensland Human Rights Commission (QHRC) and to confer on it additional oversight functions and powers under the Bill.559
[3.297] As such, the proposed QHRC could be expected to develop a relevant expertise in dealing with privacy infringements. Like the IP Act, however, the Bill generally applies only to the activities of public entities.
Complaints mechanism
[3.298] None of the Australian jurisdictions includes a specific comX`plaints mechanism in their surveillance devices legislation, but this has been proposed in some jurisdictions.
[3.299] For example, the NSWLRC recommended that complaints about breaches of the surveillance devices legislation should be made to the Privacy Commissioner in that jurisdiction for conciliation and, if unresolved, referred to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal for decision. It also considered that the Privacy Commissioner should have power to conduct inquiries and initiate investigations into breaches or threatened breaches of the legislation.560
[3.305] The ALRC, which recommended the inclusion of a civil right of action under surveillance devices legislation, also recommended a complaints mechanism for surveillance disputes between residential neighbours. It explained that:568
A number of submissions to [the ALRCs] Inquiry have raised concerns regarding CCTV cameras, installed for security in homes and offices that may also record the activities of neighbours. A low cost option for resolving disputes about surveillance devices is desirable, particularly where prosecution under surveillance legislation is inappropriate, undesirable or unsuccessful.
[3.306] Rather than making complaints to an independent regulator, the ALRC suggested that jurisdiction be given to appropriate courts and tribunals, such as civil and administrative tribunals like QCAT or specialist courts like the Queensland Planning and Environment Court. It observed that:569 Many of the types of disputes that may currently be heard in these tribunals involve an element of privacy, and in particular the protection of privacy in disputes between neighbours. In des Forges v Kangaroo Point Residents Association, the [Queensland Planning and Environment Court] set aside development approval for three residential towers because insufficient regard has been paid to the actual intensity of the development, to boundary clearances, separation, privacy and the consequential effects on views. (note omitted)
[3.307] In Queensland, some specific neighbour disputes are also dealt with under the Neighbourhood Disputes (Dividing Fences and Trees) Act 2011. 570
Appendix A Terms of reference
Queenslands Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 provides a number of offences relating to the use of listening devices to overhear, record, monitor or listen to private conversations. However, the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 does not prohibit or regulate optical, tracking or data surveillance devices.
As a result, Queenslanders must rely on general laws where surveillance devices have unreasonably intruded on their privacy. These laws include common law actions such as trespass and nuisance, the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 in limited circumstances and section 227A of the Criminal Code Act 1899 (which prohibits a person observing or visually recording another person in circumstances where a reasonable adult would expect to be afforded privacy without that persons consent).
Appendix D Civil surveillance law reform reviews in other jurisdictions
New South Wales Law Reform Commission (NSWLRC), Surveillance: an interim report, Report No 98 (February 2001) and Surveillance, Report No 108 (May 2005);
Victorian Law Reform Commission (VLRC), Surveillance in Public Places, Consultation Paper No 7 (March 2009) and Surveillance in Public Places, Report No 18 (June 2010);
Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC), Serious Invasions of Privacy in the Digital Era, Discussion Paper No 80 (March 2014) and Serious Invasions of Privacy in the Digital Era, Report No 123 (June 2014); and
D Stewart, Review of ACT Civil Surveillance Regulation (Report, June 2016).
Appendix E International human rights and privacy instruments
[E.1] A right to privacy is recognised in international human rights instruments to which Australia is a signatory, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).669
[E.2] Article 17 of the ICCPR provides that:670
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.
Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
[E.3] The United Nations Human Rights Committee explains that the obligations imposed by article 17 require state parties to adopt legislative and other measures to give effect to the prohibition against such interferences and attacks as well as to the protection of this right. Relevantly, the Committee observes that:671
Surveillance, whether electronic or otherwise, interceptions of telephonic, telegraphic and other forms of communication, wire tapping and recording of conversations should be prohibited. Searches of a persons home should be restricted to a search for necessary evidence and should not be allowed to amount to harassment.
[E.5] In Australia, the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) and the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) provide, in virtually the same terms, that a person has the right not to have their privacy, family, home or correspondence unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with and not to have their reputation unlawfully attacked.673 In Queensland, the Human Rights Bill 2018 also includes this right:674
https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/pdf/inforce/current/act-1899-009Chapter 22 Offences against morality
Definitions
intimate image, of a person
(a) means a moving or still image that depicts
(i) the person engaged in an intimate sexual activity that is not ordinarily done in public; or
(ii) the persons genital or anal region, when it is bare or covered only by underwear; or
(iii) if the person is female or a transgender or intersex person who identifies as femalethe persons bare breasts; and
(b) includes an image that has been altered to appear to show any of the things mentioned in paragraph (a)(i) to (iii); and
(c) includes an image depicting a thing mentioned in paragraph (a)(i) to (iii), even if the thing has been digitally obscured, if the person is depicted in a sexual way.
observe means observe by any means.
private act, for a person, means
(a) showering or bathing; or
(b) using a toilet; or
(c) another activity when the person is in a state of undress;or
(d) intimate sexual activity that is not ordinarily done in public.
private place means a place where a person might reasonably be expected to be engaging in a private act.
prohibited visual recording, of a person, means
(a) a visual recording of the person, in a private place or engaging in a private act, made in circumstances where a reasonable adult would expect to be afforded privacy;or
(b) a visual recording of the persons genital or anal region, when it is bare or covered only by underwear, made in circumstances where a reasonable adult would expect to be afforded privacy in relation to that region.
223 Distributing intimate images
(1) A person who distributes an intimate image of another
person
(a) without the other persons consent; and
(b) in a way that would cause the other person distress
reasonably arising in all the circumstances;commits a misdemeanour.
Examples of circumstances for subsection (1)(b)
the circumstances surrounding the distribution of the intimate
image
the extent to which the distribution of the intimate image interferes
with the other persons privacy
the relationship, if any, between the person who distributes the
intimate image and the other person
Maximum penalty3 years imprisonment.
(2) For subsection (1)(a), a child under the age of 16 years is
incapable of giving consent.
(3) For subsection (1)(b), it is immaterial whether the person who
distributes the intimate image intends to cause, or actually
causes, the other person distress.
(4) It is a defence to a charge of an offence against subsection (1)
to prove that
(a) the person engaged in the conduct that is alleged to
constitute the offence for a genuine artistic, educational,
legal, medical, scientific or public benefit purpose; and
(b) the persons conduct was, in the circumstances,
reasonable for that purpose.
(5) In this section
consent means consent freely and voluntarily given by a
person with the cognitive capacity to give the consent.
227A Observations or recordings in breach of privacy
(1) A person who observes or visually records another person, in
circumstances where a reasonable adult would expect to be
afforded privacy
(a) without the other persons consent; and
(b) when the other person
(i) is in a private place; or
(ii) is engaging in a private act and the observation or
visual recording is made for the purpose of
observing or visually recording a private act;commits a misdemeanour.
Maximum penalty3 years imprisonment.
Examples of circumstances where a reasonable adult would expect to be
afforded privacy
1 A person changing in a communal change room at a swimming
pool may expect to be observed by another person who is also
changing in the room but may not expect to be visually recorded.
2 A person who needs help to dress or use a toilet may expect to be
observed by the person giving the help but may not expect to be
observed by another person.
(2) A person who observes or visually records another persons
genital or anal region, in circumstances where a reasonable
adult would expect to be afforded privacy in relation to that
region
without the other persons consent; and
when the observation or visual recording is made for the purpose of observing or visually recording the other persons genital or anal region; commits a misdemeanour. Maximum penalty3 years imprisonment. Example for subsection (2) using a mobile phone in a public place to take photos of womens underwear under their skirts without their consent (3) In this section consent means consent freely and voluntarily given by a person with the cognitive capacity to give the consent. genital or anal region, of a person, means the persons genital or anal region when it is bare or covered only by underwear.
227B Distributing prohibited visual recordings
(1) A person who distributes a prohibited visual recording of
another person having reason to believe it to be a prohibited
visual recording, without the other persons consent, commits
a misdemeanour.
Maximum penalty3 years imprisonment.
(2) In this section
consent means consent freely and voluntarily given by a
person with the cognitive capacity to give the consent.
227C Persons who are not criminally responsible for offences against ss 223, 227A and 227B
(1) A person is not criminally responsible for an offence against section 223, 227A(1) or (2) or 227B(1) if
(a) the person is, at the time of the offence, a law enforcement officer acting in the course of the persons duties; and
(b) the persons conduct is reasonable in the circumstances for the performance of the duties.
(2) A person is not criminally responsible for an offence against section 223, 227A(1) or (2) or 227B(1) in relation to an intimate image or an observation or visual recording of another person who is in lawful custody or subject to a supervision order if
(a) the person is, at the time of the offence, acting during the persons duties in relation to the other persons lawful custody or supervision order; and
(b) the persons conduct is reasonable in the circumstances for the performance of the duties.
Examples of conduct that may be reasonable for the performance of duties
the observation of a person for the safety of the person or another person
the observation of a person providing a urine sample for a drug test
228B Making child exploitation material
228C Distributing child exploitation material
228D Possessing child exploitation material
228E Defences for ss 228A228DC
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1256168/australia-security-camera-usage-at-home-by-state/Share of respondents who use security cameras at home in Australia from April 2020 to April 2021, by state
https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/4530.0~2017-18~Main%20Features~Type%20of%20home%20security%20~36
679000 is3.4115459980907%of 19903000.
https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/2021/03/udhr.pdfArticle 12 No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Bibliography
Australian Bureau of Statistics, Main Features - Type of Home Security, Abs.gov.au (2017) <https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/4530.0~2017-18~Main%20Features~Type%20of%20home%20security%20~36>
Australian Law Reform Commission, Serious Invasions of Privacy in the Digital Era : Summary Report (NSW Law Reform Commission, 2014)
Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld)
High Court Of Australia, ABC v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd [2001] HCA 63; 208 CLR 199; 185 ALR 1; 76 ALJR 1 (15 November 2001), classic.austlii.edu.au (15 November 2001) <http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2001/63.html?query=>
Hughes, Christopher, Australia: Security Camera Usage at Home by State 2021, Statista (2 April 2022) <https://www.statista.com/statistics/1256168/australia-security-camera-usage-at-home-by-state/>
Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld)
Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld)
Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld)
NSW Law Reform Commission, Invasion of Privacy (New South Wales Law Reform Commission, 2009)
Privacy Act 1988 (Cth)
Queensland Law Reform Commission, Review of Queenslands Laws Relating to Civil Surveillance and the Protection of Privacy in the Context of Current and Emerging Technologies: Consultation Paper (Queensland Law Reform Commission, 2018)
Surveillance Devices Act 2004 (Cth)
ASSESSMENT
Choose one event that occurred overseas or domestically and build your answer around it. Critically evaluate
how the role either or public or private security or both were involved (if applicable). Investigate societal and
legal implications emerge since the incident occurred onwards. The required citation style is AGLC 4 and the
research paper should be compliant with this citation style. Related instructions will be provided through the
Canvas site of the unit.
It follows the development of the argument of your research paper (we might call that thesis statement). The argument of the research paper is a short statement you put forward for the 'audience' of your paper as what you are trying to explain or prove. It is important to remember that this is just a starting point. Many students stop right there, and then dont understand why the assessor graded them poorly. A research paper argument needs to be definitive, and should not be about you. Keep it academic, keep it objective. Avoid first person expressions. You are to argue about something for which other scholars also argue (or argue about a relevant aspect of the topic concerned).
Dear students,
That might be a structure to adopt for your research paper. Again, on obligation to strictly follow :-)
Introduction: This section will introduce the topic to be considered in the context of aresearchpaper
Literature review: This section sets up the theoretical background of discussion. What other scholars argue about this topic or aspects of this topic.
Main body: This section provides justifications that strengthens thepaperargument. Justifications should be also supported from related examples. Consequently, the examples empower the argumentation and provides a more sophisticated analysis.
Conclusions/ Recommendations: This section adds value to the literature. Provides a recommendation or list of recommendations to be followed or implemented with potential to improve the discussed regulatory framework (if applicable) or/ and improve policies attached to the issue considered in thepaper.
Privacy v Security
A Dispute to Residential Security Cameras
Introduction
Residential security cameras are a vastly beneficial technology to the average Australian, they allow for the active and passive surveillance of property, the recording of audio and visual, and provide a feeling of security, and most importantly, most are inexpensive. This technology however proves controversial to the balance of Privacy and Security, and hidden behind the premise of security can be vailed several means for the invasion of privacy by any person who owns or operates a home security system. This report will focus of the jurisdiction of Queensland, and thus will analyse how Commonwealth and State legislation, currently lack abilities to regulate and hold the average residential operator accountable to misuse of a security device.
Security camera context
The types of cameras discussed will be taken from range that is affordable and available such as Kmart (Outdoor Bullet Camera, Indoor/Outdoor Camera, and Video Doorbell) , and Ring (Stick-Up Cam, Spotlight Cam, Floodlight cam). The cameras listed above, specifications are listed in Appendix A, but can be summarised to having a field of views of 100-150 degrees, two-way audio capabilities, 1080p High-definition day and night recording, with remote access (by phone or tablet) and Cloud storage.
Scenario
This report will focus on the misuse of a neighbours security camera. This will include analysing the differences of law for camera looking into a bedroom, versus a camera looking into a neighbours pool, backyard, or living space. Therefore, setting specific guidelines in how law can be utilised.
Commonwealth Legislation.
Section 109 of the Australian Constitution states that When a law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid. Therefore all Queensland legislation discussed below, if inconsistent, should be disregarded.
Queensland Legislation
The average Australian would expect privacy in their own home, with freedoms and protections by law to prevent the invasion of privacy. However, due to Commonwealth privacy and surveillance devices acts being limited to regulate government agencies, entities, and other organisations, the burden of protections to invasion of privacy falls to each state to legislate.
Current legislation for QLD includes; the Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld), Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld), Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld), Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld)
The Criminal Code Act (1899) (QLD)
210 Indecent treatment of children under 16
(f) without legitimate reason, takes any indecent photograph or records, by means of any device, any indecent visual image of a child under the age of 16 years;is guilty of an indictable offence.
(2) If the child is of or above the age of 12 years, the offender is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for 14 years.
(3) If the child is under the age of 12 years, the offender is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for 20 years.
223 Distributing intimate images
(1) A person who distributes an intimate image of another person
(a) without the other persons consent; and
(b) in a way that would cause the other person distress reasonably arising in all the circumstances; commits a misdemeanour.
Maximum penalty3 years imprisonment. (2) For subsection (1)(a), a child under the age of 16 years is incapable of giving consent. (3) For subsection (1)(b), it is immaterial whether the person who distributes the intimate image intends to cause, or actually causes, the other person distress.
s.227A Observations or recordings in breach of privacy
(1) A person who observes or visually records another person, in circumstances where a reasonable adult would expect to be afforded privacy
(a) without the other persons consent; and
(b) when the other person
(i) is in a private place; or
(ii) is engaging in a private act and the observation or visual recording is made for the purpose of observing or visually recording a private act;commits a misdemeanour.
Maximum penalty3 years imprisonment
227B Distributing prohibited visual recordings
(1) A person who distributes a prohibited visual recording of another person having reason to believe it to be a prohibited visual recording, without the other persons consent, commits a misdemeanour. Maximum penalty3 years imprisonment. (2) In this section consent means consent freely and voluntarily given by a person with the cognitive capacity to give the consent.
Privacy act Unusable
Queensland Criminal code reactive, not pro-active, limited uses.
Security devices legislation - Insufficient
Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) (Half and half)
Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld) (Unusable)
Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld) (Unusable)
Conclusion
POSIBLE USES
The following review of literature is towards 3 key concepts related to residential security cameras. These concepts are Security cameras as a Crime deterrent and evidence collection method, Security and privacy vulnerabilities, and the potential for invasion of privacy of neighbours. By assessing and evaluating all three concepts, a strong foundation will be set to determine that current laws are insufficient to protect the average residents privacy from one another.
Signs, lights, and guard dogs have long since been key deterrent in residential security, however with the increase in technology for security cameras, they have often been replaced by security cameras. In 2018 The Australian Beauro of statistics released a study showing that approximately 12% of Australian homes had security cameras installed, and noted 5% increase of security measures because of perceived increase in crime or public nuisance. Furthermore, an awareness of security between those affects by crime in the past 12 months, and residents not affected by crime are 60% and 26% respectively. In January 2021 to September 2022, Queensland Police statistics for offences involving dwellings (Appendix B). Unlawful Entry With Intent (45,631), Unlawful Entry Without Violence (44,375), Unlawful Entry With Violence (1,256), and Stealing from Dwellings (11,349). To reduce errors, only offences mentioning dwellings are included, therefore a total of 102,611 offences do not include, rape, murder, violent or other acts in which may have occurred within a private residence/dwelling.
Appendix A
Seller Camera Name Features
Kmart
Full HD Wi-Fi Outdoor Bullet Camera
Mains powered
1080P Full HD live stream
Remote access - watch live on video on your smartphone or tablet anytime, anywhere
View recordings on your smartphone or tablet using a micro SD card (not included)
100 degrees wide viewing angle
Two way audio between smartphone and camera
LED IR night vision up to 10m
Motion detection with activity zoning
Wi-Fi enabled (compatible only on 2.4GH Wi-Fi network)
Supports micro SD card up to 128GB
Works with Google Assistant and Amazon Alexa
IP65 water and dust resistant
Kmart
Full HD Wi-Fi Rechargeable Indoor and Outdoor Camera rechargeable indoor or outdoor camera
1080P Full HD video quality, live stream and view recordings
Remote access - watch live on smartphone or tablet
View recordings on smartphone or tablet using micro sd card (not included)
Built-in rechargeable battery, provides months of use on each charge
Wire free installation
Advanced motion detection distance up to 10m
145 degree wide viewing angle
Night vision distance up to 10m
Two-way audio between smartphone and camera
IP54 water-resistant
Compact and portable, fully wireless and easy to install
Compatible only on 2.4GHz Wi-Fi network
IP54 water resistant
Kmart
Full HD Wi-Fi Video Doorbell with Chime Remote access - watch live on smartphone or tablet
View recordings on smartphone or tablet using micro sd card (not included)
130 degree wide viewing angle
Wireless USB chime
Wire free installation
Two-way audio between smartphone and doorbell
Supports micro SD card
Night vision
Built-in rechargeable battery
Motion detection
IP54 water-resistant
1080P full HD live stream
Compatible only on 2.4GHz Wi-Fi network
Ring Floodlight Cam Wired Pro
Video: 1080p HD, HDR, Live View, Colour Night Vision, Advanced Pre-roll 1
Motion Detection: 3D Motion Detection with Birds Eye View; Customisable Motion Zones
Field of View: 140 horizontal, 80 vertical
Siren: Remote-activated 110dB siren (level measured at 10cm distance)
Audio: Two-Way Talk with Audio+
Lights: Two LED Floodlights, 2000 Lumens (combined) with adjustable brightness, Colour Temperature 3000K
Ring
Spotlight Cam Pro Plug-In
Video: 1080p HD, HDR, Live View, Colour Night Vision
Motion Detection: 3D Motion Detection, Bird's Eye View, Custom Motion Zones up to 9m
Field of View: 140 horizontal, 80 vertical
Siren: Remote-activated siren
Audio: Two-Way Talk with Audio+ and advanced noise cancellation
Lights: Two 3000K spotlights
Ring Stick Up Cam Elite Video: 1080p HD, Live View, Colour Night Vision
Motion Detection: Advanced Motion Detection, Customisable Motion Zones
Field of View: 150 horizontal, 85 vertical
Audio: Two-way audio with noise cancellation
Appendix B
Offence Date Unlawful Entry With Intent - Dwelling Unlawful Entry Without Violence - Dwelling Unlawful Entry With Violence - Dwelling Stealing - Dwellings Monthly Totals
Jan-21 2080 2007 73 646 4806
Feb-21 1915 1861 54 555 4385
Mar-21 1915 1863 52 585 4415
Apr-21 2024 1974 50 570 4618
May-21 2345 2288 57 548 5238
Jun-21 1955 1908 47 525 4435
Jul-21 1803 1724 79 571 4177
Aug-21 1690 1637 53 541 3921
Sep-21 1845 1785 60 545 4235
Oct-21 2361 2284 77 531 5253
Nov-21 2346 2270 76 573 5265
Dec-21 2331 2274 57 563 5225
Jan-22 2632 2563 69 537 5801
Feb-22 2181 2123 58 478 4840
Mar-22 2580 2517 63 513 5673
Apr-22 2348 2289 59 460 5156
May-22 2196 2138 58 506 4898
Jun-22 2341 2275 66 491 5173
Jul-22 2164 2112 52 490 4818
Aug-22 2158 2114 44 543 4859
Sep-22 2421 2369 52 578 5420
Grand Totals 45631 44375 1256 11349 102611
. Any rights or freedoms of the people rely strictly on legislation and Civil Torts that criss-cross the territory, state, and federal domains. Due to the length process, and quickly evolving emerging technologies, legal gaps have appeared in which citizens utilising security cameras in a private capacity are able to bypass most laws, privacy acts, and Australian Privacy Principles. This reports aims to analysis the existing torts and legislation to determine gaps in legal protections. Furthermore analysis into proposed bills and amendments, will aim to indicate whether sufficient legal protections, rights, and obligations will be granted to regulate emerging technologies, when utilised in a private capacity.
Scenarios Posed to analyse the standing of law on security footage.
DefinitionsPrivate act, for a person, means
(a) showering or bathing; or
(b) using a toilet; or
(c) another activity when the person is in a state of undress; or
(d) intimate sexual activity that is not ordinarily done in public.
The Criminal Code 1899 (QLD)
Private place means a place where a person might reasonably be expected to be engaging in a private act.
The Criminal Code 1899 (QLD)
APP entitymeans an agency or organisation.
Privacy Act 1988 (cth)
Privacy Act 1988 (cth)
The Privacy act 1988 (Cth) is not a legislation in which hold much relevance to the use of security cameras in a private capacity. The legislation defines that an APP entity and organisation must comply with all 13 APPs, and denotes that an individual should be informed they are being recorded, as well as the information be secure thought use, then destroyed/de-identified after a determined period). However The Privacy Act doesnt cover a security camera operated by an individual acting in a private capacity OAIC n.d. in which determines that a homeowner may place a camera that is insecure, and in violation of several APPS. It is critical to note that where the Privacy Act 1988 (cth) has gaps, it is expected that state, or territory legislation be made to place limitations and regulations on such systems. This provision may not protect an individual working in a private capacity if the security camera exists on the property of a home business (AS defined in the Privacy Act 1988).
The Criminal Code 1899 (Qld)The Criminal Code 1899 (QLD) Section 227A states that if a recoding or observation is made when the other person is in a private place, or committing a private act, the resulting penalty is a misdemeanour with a maximum punishment of 3 years imprisonment. Section 227B Subsection (1) indicates that if the video recording is thought to be prohibited, and is distributed without consent of the recorded person, a misdemeanour with a maximum punishment of 3 years imprisonment is also committed. Section 227C Subsections 1 and 2, absolves a person of criminal responsibility if they are a law enforcement officer undergoing duties at the time, or the conduct of the person was reasonable in the performance to their duties.
Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld)
Section 43 (1), states A person is guilty of an offence against this Act if the person uses a listening device to overhear, record, monitor or listen to a private conversation. Conviction of this offence carries a two year imprisonment or 40 Penalty units. Hearing aids or other devices to aid the hearing impaired are the only items exempt from this section. This therefore indicates that security cameras with the option to monitor and record audio are able to constitute an invasion of privacy under subsection 43 (1). If the user of the security camera is receives audio from nearby households and are not partied to that information, they hold no rights to exclusion under subsection 2. This can therefore conclude that any audio received from neighbouring properties is in offence of the Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld)
This section of law then therefore only dictates a surveillance device to be illegal if the camera FOV includes Bathroom, Toilets, showers, bedrooms, people in a state of undress, or during intimate sexual activities. Including Section 227A (2 and 3) in which involves the specific filming of genital or anal regions when bare or covered by underwear.
This brings into question whether a reasonable person has the expectation of privacy when in areas not visible from public access. This includes for example a camera targeting a backyard pool area; surrounded by fences in which the owners wife wears swimwear, sunbathes, or skinny dips. It is therefore reasonable to assume that as no public access to the area exists, and the owner of the camera must go to effort to place within the FOV of the camera without sufficiently focusing on common land or their own private property. Then it is highly likely an invasion of privacy is being committed in specific breach to 227(A.
What gaps exist within current lawIs there a tort of invasion of privacy for recording devicesAnalysis of proposed lawFundamentally the systems of laws within Australia is flawed and security has overcome the right of privacy. Security must maintain an appropriate balance with privacy, differing in times of national emergency, war or peace. At current times in residential addresses in Australia it should be set that cameras should not impede on the activities of citizens within their dwelling or within a reasonable fenced/covered area of the private property. It is suggested a good neighbour should consult affected neighbouring domiciles, and discuss wether the camera may be placed to fully protect the invididuals property while limiting the FOV into other properties.
Dear students,
I hope that the information that follows below might help you (especially those who do not know how to start and it will be their first research paper experience :-)) to start working on your research paper. Nevertheless, one size does not fit all. Therefore, I will understand and respect if some of you might have a different perspective.
First step is to get familiar with the task, with the assignment: This may seem apparent, but its really vital to grasp what I am looking for before you start writing your research paper. Many students miss this phase, and then wonder why they got a poor mark on a paper they worked hard on or were enthused about. Its typically because they didnt read the directions.
Then, decide on the topic/ subject: As I already recommended, it is good (from many aspects) to stick to the same topic used for assignment 1. However, don't get too worked up over this. While writing on a subject you have been working on (in the context of assignmen 1) and you are passionate and interested about might be beneficial. Yet, don't stress yourself over coming up with the right idea and whether (eventually) whether your research topic is perfect. Nobody is perfect :-). When given the choice, a contentious subject is often the best choice since it allows you to practise your abilities to explain and defend opposing viewpoints in an impartial manner.
And it follows another crucial step: start the research, gather information. This step is pretty flexible; different students will research for a paper in different ways. However, its significant to stay focused and move pretty quickly. After all, you still have to write your research paper. Hints: 1) skim, 2) find reliable resources, and 3) dont ignore information.
After the completion of research you should be able now to compile/ synthesize the gathered information. In other words, this step is where the research paper is getting structured. Once again, same things to consider with previous step which means that there is a plethora or approaches on how to do this (we are all different and unique, simultaneously :-)). It can also depend on your assignment.
It follows the development of the argument of your research paper (we might call that thesis statement). The argument of the research paper is a short statement you put forward for the 'audience' of your paper as what you are trying to explain or prove. It is important to remember that this is just a starting point. Many students stop right there, and then dont understand why the assessor graded them poorly. A research paper argument needs to be definitive, and should not be about you. Keep it academic, keep it objective. Avoid first person expressions. You are to argue about something for which other scholars also argue (or argue about a relevant aspect of the topic concerned).
I would to reiterate that this might not fit all but it can be of assistance and a way to 'boost' your offorts :-)
Kind regards,
Dr. Nikos KoutrasUnit Coordinator
Dear students,
That might be a structure to adopt for your research paper. Again, on obligation to strictly follow :-)
Introduction: This section will introduce the topic to be considered in the context of aresearchpaper
Lit.erature review: This section sets up the theoretical background of discussion. What other scholars argue about this topic or aspects of this topic.
Main body: This section provides justifications that strengthens thepaperargument. Justifications should be also supported from related examples. Consequently, the examples empower the argumentation and provides a more sophisticated analysis.
Conclusions/ Recommendations: This section adds value to the literature. Provides a recommendation or list of recommendations to be followed or implemented with potential to improve the discussed regulatory framework (if applicable) or/ and improve policies attached to the issue considered in thepaper.
Kind regards,
Dr. Nikos KoutrasUnit Coordinator
Assessment Task 2: Research Paper (submission)ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONSChoose one event that occured overseas or domestically and build your answer around it. Critically evaluate how the role either or public or private security or both were involved (if applicable). Investigate societal and legal implications emerge since the incident occurred onwards. The required citation style is AGLC 4 and the research paper should be compliant with this citation style. Related instructions will be provided through the Canvas site of the unit. MARKING CRITERIASee Canvas - > Assignment - > Assignment 2 - > Research Paper (Rubric).In addition, the latest ECU Handbook should be consulted for information relating to examinations, appeals, changes of enrolment and withdrawals and other Faculty regulations.
