NOTE: The views and opinions expressed herein in no way reflect those of my employer or colleagues. They are all my own and I take responsibility for them.
I read a little article recently about a guy name Rob Spence in Canada who plans to install a camera in his fake eye. (similar articles are at http://deadlinescotland.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/robs-all-seeing-eye-set-for-tv-screens-396/ and here http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/12/eye-spy-filmmak.html )
He wants to record things he sees. He has even been colloquially dubbed a ‘life caster’ along with a couple others who are doing this such as Justin Kan http://www.justin.tv/justin.
They say that they aren’t going to record things like gyms, private events, etc. According to Rob
“Spence is willing to turn off his camera in spaces such as gyms, theaters or private events. But he will be making many of those decisions on the spur, every day”
So then again, he might decide to record you in the gym, even the locker room.
But this guy is an armature film maker. He wants to record his life experience with this project.
This means recording people on the street, without their knowledge. He may even get famous from his little films and you would be the star…voluntarily, and unbeknownst to you of course.
We live in a world where privacy is becoming a bit concern. These guys claim to be doing this to heighten people’s awareness of privacy but it’s just their word on it.
Now I'm not a big fan of over reacting or freaking out and going overboard with being politically correct. but this even freaks me out.
Yeah sure the government has been able to secretly record you for many decades but I have nothing to hide from them. This guy, or other ‘life casters’ are just people, with no legal jurisdiction to record me, my life, or anything about me.
That bugs me, especially if they plan to turn it into a film and make money off of it. They don’t have to have a warrant, your permission or anything else other than line of sight.
So what does this say about privacy? In some EU countries where there is a right to privacy on the books, will this kind of thing be banned? In the US where there “is a reasonable expectation of privacy” you may be on the short end of the stick.
Yes I realise we are on surveillance video all of the time, but that is controlled and there are legal precedents around how it can be used.
What would you do if you saw a person recording you with a hand-held video camera? Not just a tourist recording the scenery that you happen to be walking through, but following your actions with his camera. It normally freaks people out.
In fact if you do it at a Sydney beach, you will get arrested. But this guy will be able to do that, for personal (ewww) use, or even profit with no restrictions on how he can use the video.
Where do we draw the line? At least with a hand-held camera you can see it and have a reasonable understanding if you are being filmed by private person or not and chose to leave the area. With eye cameras, you won’t be able to protect yourself because you won’t know you’re being filmed and more importantly you won’t know what will be done with the video.
Hey I’m not a supporter of an Orwellian government, but this is going too far in my opinion.
This kind of reminds me of that movie, Strange Days. In it, people could "experience" someone's recorded experience. Of course, that involved recording through the cerebral cortex and all sensory input (and it supposedly happened in 1999), but we're getting there.