Friday, 9 October 2026 SourcesAbout🌓
🇬🇧 UK ▾
BREAKING
› Singapore GP: Wide-open battle for pole expected in Sprint Qualifying LIVE!› Wolff: People who think Mercedes favour Antonelli should watch Teletubbies› Arsenal latest: Arteta set to talk contract, injuries and Man City LIVE!› Liverpool latest: Iraola gives injury updates ahead of Man City› Scot Prem: Rangers must be obsessed with winning or noise can return, warns McInnes› Transfer Centre LIVE! Bayern chief 'positive' about Kane contract talks› Weekend Winners: Kate, Sam and Declan have their say on Silver Trophy› World Mental Health Day: Sky Sports partners with Mental Health Foundation› Doyle: Castle can defend his unbeaten record in Dewhurst› Best bits from Maresca's first Man City press conference since guilty verdict› Singapore GP: Wide-open battle for pole expected in Sprint Qualifying LIVE!› Wolff: People who think Mercedes favour Antonelli should watch Teletubbies› Arsenal latest: Arteta set to talk contract, injuries and Man City LIVE!› Liverpool latest: Iraola gives injury updates ahead of Man City› Scot Prem: Rangers must be obsessed with winning or noise can return, warns McInnes› Transfer Centre LIVE! Bayern chief 'positive' about Kane contract talks› Weekend Winners: Kate, Sam and Declan have their say on Silver Trophy› World Mental Health Day: Sky Sports partners with Mental Health Foundation› Doyle: Castle can defend his unbeaten record in Dewhurst› Best bits from Maresca's first Man City press conference since guilty verdict
Technology

The hidden legal dangers of your video doorbell and security cameras — how to protect yourself without getting caught out

TechRadar ·
The hidden legal dangers of your video doorbell and security cameras — how to protect yourself without getting caught out

When Jon Woodard proudly installed the latest security technology on his Oxfordshire home, including a Ring video doorbell and a security camera on his shed, little did he realise that it would result in a landmark case that was to set him back thousands of pounds in damages.

The dispute began innocently enough with an invitation from Mr Woodard to his neighbour, Dr Mary Fairhurst, for a tour of his newly renovated home during which he showcased his then cutting-edge security setup.

But it soon descended into an acrimonious battle when, in the words of the judgement, Dr Fairhurst was "alarmed and appalled" to discover that the camera mounted on Mr Woodard’s shed pointed directly at her property.

As well as objecting to live video footage being streamed directly to Mr Woodard’s smartphone, the court heard how she found the audio data which captured her private conversations "even more problematic and detrimental than video data.” And when the case landed in Oxford County Court, Judge Melissa Clarke upheld claims that the devices "unjustifiably invaded" Fairhurst’s privacy and their use breached the Data Protection Act 2018 as well as UK General Data Protection (GDPR) legislation.

Crucially, the court singled out the audio data collected by the cameras as being "more problematic and detrimental than video data" because it captured conversations from people who were entirely unaware that a device was listening or that audio was being processed.

As a result, Mr Woodard was ordered to pay damages and a fine believed to total up to £100,000.

Speaking at the time of the case in October 2021, digital privacy expert Hannah Hart of Pro Privacy told the BBC : “While this case doesn’t set a legal precedent, it does continue an ongoing conversation about our changing attitude towards domestic surveillance — and how normalised it has become in our communities.” Navigating legal boundaries of home surveillance Five years on from the landmark case and the risk of falling foul of the law with home security equipment has only grown as new technology such as facial recognition has become commonplace, and users have turned to social media to post video footage taken with their security cameras and video doorbells.

In very broad terms, those using this kind of surveillance technology must have a lawful basis for doing so Lisa Sweetman, Knights And while understanding what you can and can’t do with domestic cameras does vary between regions, in most countries there is legislation in place to protect the privacy of individuals whose images and, potentially voices, are captured on these devices.

Read the full article on TechRadar ›

5News aggregated this summary from the outlet’s public feed. The full article, with all the context, is on www.techradar.com — the content belongs to TechRadar.

More from TechRadar

See all ›

More in Technology

See all ›