Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Privacy-Invading Technologies and Privacy by Design pp 113–155Cite as

Public Space CCTV Microphones and Loudspeakers: The Ears and Mouth of “Big Brother”

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Information Technology and Law Series ((ITLS,volume 25))

Abstract

This chapter briefly introduces the privacy-intrusive evolution of CCTV surveillance technology; outlines the social and privacy implications of the deployment of CCTV microphones and loudspeakers; reveals the scope of deployment of CCTV microphones and loudspeakers in the UK; briefly outlines the problems, weaknesses and deficiencies of earlier CCTV systems and explains the potential security gains of attaching or integrating microphones and loudspeakers to CCTV cameras; describes the potential alternatives to CCTV microphones and loudspeakers; provides an overview of the statutory laws and case law of special relevance in the UK; evaluates the relevant deficiencies and dilemmas of the UK legal framework in terms of safeguarding privacy and liberty with regard to the deployment and use of CCTV microphones and loudspeakers; and proposes some policy-relevant recommendations, including proposals on how to enhance the UK legal framework and address the issues identified.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    “FactCheck: how many CCTV cameras?”, Channel 4 News,18 June 2008, available at: http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/society/factcheck+how+many+cctv+cameras/2291167. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  2. 2.

    For further discussion, see Cannataci 2010.

  3. 3.

    The Intelligent Video Surveillance (IVS) market is growing rapidly. Honeywell’s Active Alert® and Keeneo’s tailor-made software are just two examples of systems on the market that can automatically determine and classify different human behaviours and alert CCTV operators. Portsmouth has recently become the first city in the UK to set up a network of ‘intelligent’ cameras that can alert CCTV operators of ‘suspicious’ behaviour. See Slack J. “Minority Report comes to Britain: The CCTV that spots crimes BEFORE they happen” (Daily Mail, 28 November 2008), available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1089966/Minority-Report-comes-Britain-The-CCTV-spots-crimes-BEFORE-happen.html. Accessed 20 February 2014; ‘“Sci-Fi Film’ CCTV Predicts Crime” (Sky News, 27 November 2008); An ‘intelligent’ CCTV camera, nicknamed “the Bug”, designed to predict when a person may be about to commit a crime, is also being tested in high streets and shopping centres in the UK. The camera consists of a ring of eight cameras scanning in all directions. Software linked to the camera can determine when anybody is behaving unusually or suspiciously. A ninth camera then zooms into follow that person. See Iredale W, Gourlay C. “CCTV camera ‘tails’ suspects” (Sunday Times, 15 April 2007). There are also a number of on-going projects funded by the EU to improve the functionality and reliability of IVS. For example, Project SAMURAI and Project ADABTS aim to develop intelligent public surveillance software integrated with CCTV cameras for real-time behaviour profiling. Project Smart-Eyes (SEARISE) is even more advanced. The project’s consortium aims to develop an “artificial cognitive visual system” for detecting, tracking and categorizing salient events and behaviours. The plan is to test the system in large crowded public spaces, once completed in 2011.

  4. 4.

    Surette 2005.

  5. 5.

    Cannataci 2010.

  6. 6.

    Surette 2005.

  7. 7.

    Cannataci 2010.

  8. 8.

    Ibid.

  9. 9.

    NYPD’s Public Security Privacy Guidelines, 2 April 2009, p. 2.

  10. 10.

    Cannataci 2010.

  11. 11.

    Ibid.

  12. 12.

    Surette 2005, p. 164.

  13. 13.

    For example, with a smartphone an ordinary individual can broadcast live videos onto USTREAM and with an iPhone can even control a small flying drone (developed by Parrot) that has a video-streaming camera. Moreover, hundreds of millions of people are walking around with a smartphone video camera and they can easily and immediately upload their videos onto YouTube.

  14. 14.

    The UK Government’s plan to install 24-h CCTV systems in the homes of 20,000 selected families to tackle anti-social behaviour is yet another reason why the “Big Brother” metaphor is still valid. In addition, hundreds of CCTV cameras have already been deployed within housing trusts across the UK. see Little A. “Sin bins for worst families” (Daily Express, 23 July 2009), available at: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/115736. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  15. 15.

    Norris and Armstrong 1999, p. 5.

  16. 16.

    Orwell 1949, p. 9.

  17. 17.

    See Long 1967, p. viii.

  18. 18.

    Foucault 1980, p. 155.

  19. 19.

    Bannister et al. 1998.

  20. 20.

    Schermer 2007, pp. 217–218.

  21. 21.

    Schermer 2007.

  22. 22.

    Revolutionary technology in electronic eavesdropping includes the use of devices that transmit laser beams or very high frequency radio waves, which can enable users to listen into a conversation hundreds of feet away and practically render windows and/or walls invisible.

  23. 23.

    Derbyshire D. “Council plans to listen in on street life” (The Telegraph, 4 May 2005), available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1489282/Council-plans-to-listen-in-on-street-life.html. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  24. 24.

    There have already been concerns over the deployment of CCTV cameras positioned in a way that can view inside the windows of private homes.

  25. 25.

    However, perhaps this expectation of privacy could one day be forgotten, as today’s Internet generation (or Generation Y or Generation Z) have a growing expectation, or even desire, to communicate to an audience what most would traditionally view personal. see Nussbaum E. “Say Everything”, Kids the Internet, and the End of Privacy: The “Greatest Generation Gap Since Rock and Roll” (New York Magazine, 12 February 2007), available at: http://nymag.com/news/features/27341/. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  26. 26.

    Cockfield 2003.

  27. 27.

    A legal term predominantly adopted in US courts, which is used to refer to laws, circumstances, conditions or actions that do not explicitly prohibit the exercise of fundamental freedoms, but rather bring about unnecessary repression or burden on exercising these freedoms. The term has also been increasingly recognized and referred to by the ECtHR on numerous occasions. See, for example, Case of Kyprianou v. Cyprus, Application no. 73797/01, Judgment of 15 December 2005, para 175: Steel and Morris v. UK, Application no. 68416/01, Judgment of 15 February 2005, para 95; Case of Wille v. Liechtenstein, Application no. 28396/95, Judgment of 28 October 1999, para 50.

  28. 28.

    See “Tackling Anti-Social Behaviour in Mixed Tenure Areas”, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, March 2003, p. 104.

  29. 29.

    For example, a CCTV control room operator could bother people he or she sees using public telephone booths. See “Phone Pest picked targets on security video” (The Telegraph, 7 June 1996).

  30. 30.

    See the Respect Action Plan, produced by the Central Office of Information on behalf of the Respect Task Force (based in the Home Office), January 2006.

  31. 31.

    Iris scanners could rapidly advance, as a result of an innovation, known as Smart-Iris, developed from the ultra high-resolution, ultra-thin, lens-free, Panoptes cameras merged with projection devices. The advancement could remove the problems associated with traditional iris scanners, such as glare, dim lighting and the need for cooperative individuals to stop and stare at the scanners. see, for further explanation, Drummond K. “Darpa’s Beady-Eyed Camera Spots the ‘Non-Cooperative’” (Wired, 27 May 2010), available at: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/05/darpas-beady-eyed-camera-spots-the-non-cooperative/. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  32. 32.

    Willman 2007.

  33. 33.

    For further discussion, see Hubbard et al. 2004, p. 244.

  34. 34.

    Thomson 2005.

  35. 35.

    Thomson 2008.

  36. 36.

    See statement made by Baroness Walmsley, Daily Hansard, 12 June 2008, Volume No. 702, Part no. 106, Column 736, available at:

    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldhansrd/text/80612-0010.htm. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  37. 37.

    The man is no longer a suspect in the murder. See Harding E. “Mystery chuckler not the killer of Andrew Cunningham from Earlsfield” (Local Guardian, 4 June 2009), available at: http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/local/wimbledonnews/4419573.Mystery_laughter_leads_to_dead_end/. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  38. 38.

    Pienaar 2006

  39. 39.

    “CCTV plan to boost 2012 security” (BBC News, 4 March 2008), available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7278365.stm. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  40. 40.

    A Netherlands based company, specializing in the development of advanced technology for the detection and analysis of sound.  Sound Intelligence, available at: http://www.soundintel.com. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  41. 41.

    van Reijendam 2008.

  42. 42.

    See Macdonald 2009.

  43. 43.

    Sound Intelligence, available at: http://www.soundintel.com. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  44. 44.

    I sent an identical freedom of information request by email on 14 November 2008 to the Home Office. An official reply from the Home Office was received on 26 November 2008 stating that the matters raised in the request are the responsibility of the Communities and Local Government and that the request has been transferred accordingly. After several weeks and not receiving further information, I inquired with the Communities and Local Government and resent my request on 3 March 2009. I was informed within 20 days that my previous request could not be traced, but that I would receive a response to my original request by 2 April 2009. On 27 March 2009, I received the FINAL response (Ref: F0002996) informing me that despite enquiries made to a number of the Business Units, the information I requested could not be provided since the Communities and Local Government does not hold this information. It was suggested that I contact the relevant local authorities or the particular police forces. What I have learned from this process is that either the UK Government does not want to provide this information or worse that indeed the use and deployment of CCTV loudspeakers is not being tracked centrally, if it is even being tracked at all. I can only hope it is being tracked locally.

  45. 45.

    “Talking CCTV pioneered in Wiltshire” (BBC News, 23 May 2003), available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/wiltshire/2933626.stm. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  46. 46.

    See “Children remind adults to act responsibly on our streets”, Home Office, 4 April 2007.

  47. 47.

    “Offenders warned by talking CCTV” (BBC News, 13 April 2007), available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/norfolk/6551501.stm. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  48. 48.

    “Talking CCTV' to tackle smokers” (BBC News, 31 July 2008), available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/7535927.stm. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  49. 49.

    The Respect Task Force is an inter-ministerial steering group, established in 2005, with the direct responsibility over the UK Government’s ‘Respect’ agenda.

  50. 50.

    Daily Hansard, 10 May 2008, Column 427W, available at: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmhansrd/cm070510/text/70510w0019.htm. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  51. 51.

    “City pilots ‘talking’ CCTV”, Press Release, 10 December 2007, available at: www.bristol.gov.uk.

  52. 52.

    “Talking cameras coming soon…” (Hartlepool Mail, 3 October 2008), available at: http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/Talking-cameras-coming%20soon.4556556.jp. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  53. 53.

    Coligan N. “CCTV on every corner” (Liverpool Echo, 29 November 2007).

  54. 54.

    “Business Park’s Talking CCTV A ‘First’ for Fife’”, Business Homes, 1 September 2007.

  55. 55.

    SourceSecurity.com, available at: http://www.sourcesecurity.com/markets/retail-and-eas/application/co-73-ga.350.html. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  56. 56.

    “Talking CCTV Cameras—Middlesbrough”, Complus Teltronic, 13 April 2007.

  57. 57.

    Apex Radio Systems Ltd., available at: http://www.apexradio.co.uk/talkingcctv.php. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  58. 58.

    “Bosch delivers CCTV with loudspeakers to Plymouth City”, Security World Hotel, 5 May 2007.

  59. 59.

    See “Paris—Milipol to Focus on Homeland Security”, Intelligence Online, 4 October 2007.

  60. 60.

    See Gill et al. 2005, p. 34.

  61. 61.

    Welsh and Farrington 2003/2004, pp. 513–514.

  62. 62.

    “CCTV boom failing to cut crime” (BBC News, 6 May 2008), available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7384843.stm. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  63. 63.

    Hickley 2009; for further discussion, see Cannataci 2010

  64. 64.

    Smith 2004, Surette 2005.

  65. 65.

    Cannataci 2010.

  66. 66.

    Norris and Armstrong 1999.

  67. 67.

    See Camber 2008.

  68. 68.

    Kim et al. 2007, p. 383.

  69. 69.

    Ibid., p. 384.

  70. 70.

    Sound Intelligence, available at: http://www.soundintel.com. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  71. 71.

    “Teenagers could be heard on CCTV as they murdered father of three” (Daily Mail, 17 January 2008), available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-508880/Teenagers-heard-CCTV-murdered-father-three.html. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  72. 72.

    See “Children remind adults to act responsibly on our streets”, Home Office, 4 April 2007.

  73. 73.

    See “Business Park’s Talking CCTV A ‘First’ for Fife’”, Business Homes, 1 September 2007.

  74. 74.

    See “Children remind adults to act responsibly on our streets”, Home Office, 4 April 2007.

  75. 75.

    “Talking’ CCTV scolds offenders” (BBC News, 4 April 2007), available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/6524495.stm. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  76. 76.

    “TALKING CCTV cameras are set to stay in Ipswich after a trial proved a success,…”, (Evening Star, Ipswich, 20 June 2008).

  77. 77.

    Haris 2014.

  78. 78.

    “Talking CCTV a success in the city” (Nottingham Evening Post, 5 August 2008).

  79. 79.

    Mazerolle et al. 1999.

  80. 80.

    Monmonier 2004, pp. 116–119.

  81. 81.

    ShotSpotter, Inc., available at: http://www.shotspotter.com. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  82. 82.

    “Olympian challenge”, Info4 Security, 5 February 2007, available at: http://www.info4security.com. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  83. 83.

    Q-Star Technology, available at: http://www.qstartech.com. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  84. 84.

    Compound Security Systems, available at: http://www.compoundsecurity.co.uk. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  85. 85.

    Welsh and Farrington 2003/2004, p. 513.

  86. 86.

    See, for further discussion, Hubbard et al. 2004.

  87. 87.

    See Article 29 Working Party, WP 89, Opinion 4/2004 on the Processing of Personal Data by means of Video Surveillance.

  88. 88.

    Ibid.

  89. 89.

    Data Protection Act 1998, Schedule 1, Part I.

  90. 90.

    Article 29 Working Party, WP 136, Opinion 4/2007 on the concept of personal data, p. 15.

  91. 91.

    Ibid.

  92. 92.

    Taylor 2002a.

  93. 93.

    For further discussion, see Taylor 2002a.

  94. 94.

    Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, signed at Lisbon, 13 December 2007 (OJ C 306, 17.12.2007).

  95. 95.

    For further discussion, see Cannataci 2008.

  96. 96.

    See Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ C 83, 30.3.2010).

  97. 97.

    See COM (2007) 87 final, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the follow-up of the Work Programme for better implementation of the Data Protection Directive.

  98. 98.

    See Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of Individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and the free movement of such data, COM (2012) 10 final, Brussels, 25.1.2012 (Article 1).

  99. 99.

    Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (30.12.2008).

  100. 100.

    See Ibid., Recital 43.

  101. 101.

    Taylor 2002a, p. 79.

  102. 102.

    See Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 52(1).

  103. 103.

    See, e.g., Taylor 2002a, p. 80.

  104. 104.

    See, e.g., Kopp v. Switzerland, Application No. 23224/94, Judgment of 25 March 1998.

  105. 105.

    P.G. and J.H. v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 44787/98, Judgment of 25 September 2001, para 56.

  106. 106.

    Ibid., para 57.

  107. 107.

    Peck v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 44647/98, Judgment of 28 January 2003, para 57.

  108. 108.

    Niemietz v. Germany, Application No. 13710/88, Judgment of 16 December 1992, para 29.

  109. 109.

    Harris et al. 1995, p. 309. For further discussion, see Taylor 2002a.

  110. 110.

    Segerstedt-Wiberg and others v. Sweden, Application No. 62332/00, Judgment of 6 June 2006, para 107.

  111. 111.

    See Directive 95/46/EC, Recital 14.

  112. 112.

    “Word on the street … they’re listening” (Sunday Times, 26 November 2006).

  113. 113.

    Hennessy P. “CCTV camera microphones to be axed” (Telegraph, 28 January 2008), available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1576686/CCTV-camera-microphones-to-be-axed.html#continue. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  114. 114.

    CCTV code of practice 2008, p. 10.

  115. 115.

    Ibid., p. 11.

  116. 116.

    Section 1, para 1(a).

  117. 117.

    Fly tipping is a form of littering that involves illegally dumping large objects or large quantities of material or rubbish.

  118. 118.

    See Article 29 Working Party, WP 89, Opinion 4/2004 on the Processing of Personal Data by means of Video Surveillance.

  119. 119.

    COM (2007) 87 final, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the follow-up of the Work Programme for better implementation of the Data Protection Directive, p. 7.

  120. 120.

    Data Protection Act 1998, s. 29(1)(a).

  121. 121.

    For further information, see COM (2007) 87 final, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the follow-up of the Work Programme for better implementation of the Data Protection Directive. (Hence, the reason for the emergence of the Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL) on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and the free movement of such data, COM (2012) 10 final, Brussels, 25.1.2012.

  122. 122.

    See Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (30.12.2008), Recital 3. For further discussion, see Cannataci 2010.

  123. 123.

    See Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and the free movement of such data, COM (2012) 10 final, Brussels, 25.1.2012.

  124. 124.

    Michael John Durant v. Financial Services Authority [2003] EWCA (Civ) 1746. Durant made a request under Part II, Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 to obtain ‘personal data’ about him which was held by the Financial Services Authority (FSA). The FSA refused to provide all the data requested by Durant, arguing that not all of it constituted personal data, and emphasized that the definition of the words “relate to” in the DPA’s definition of personal data meant “have reference to, concern” instead of “have some connection with, connected to” (para 25). The Court of Appeal in the UK agreed with the FSA.

  125. 125.

    Ibid., para 28.

  126. 126.

    Rempell 2006, p. 823.

  127. 127.

    Ibid., pp. 825–826.

  128. 128.

    Rempell 2006, p. 840.

  129. 129.

    “The Durant case and its impact on the interpretation of the Data Protection Act 1998”, Information Commissioner’s Office, 2 February 2004.

  130. 130.

    Rempell 2006.

  131. 131.

    Ibid.

  132. 132.

    Information Commissioner’s Office, Press Release, “Common sense on Street View must prevail, says the ICO”.

  133. 133.

    See “European Commission suggests UK’s Data Protection Act is deficient” (OUT-LAW News, 15 July 2004), available at: www.out-law.com/page-4717. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  134. 134.

    See Article 29 Working Party, WP 136, Opinion 4/2007 on the concept of personal data.

  135. 135.

    Rempell 2006.

  136. 136.

    Hence, the reason why the European Commission has proposed to replace Directive 95/46/EC with a Regulation, in order to eliminate the existing fragmentation and to ensure the uniform and effective implementation of the data protection rules within every EU Member State. For further discussion, see COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS, Safeguarding Privacy in a Connected World, A European Data Protection Framework for the twenty first century, COM (2012) 9 final, Brussels, 25.1.2012.

  137. 137.

    A voice-print is data representing patterns in a digital recording of an individual’s voice.

  138. 138.

    PART 1: Identification Roadmap 2005–2020, Biometrics Technology Roadmap for Person Identification within the Police Service, Police IT Organization, p. 4.

  139. 139.

    However, the Identity Documents Act 2010 recently repealed the Identity Cards Act 2006, which permitted the recording of any type of biometric information for the National Identity Register (NIR).

  140. 140.

    CCTV code of practice 2008, p. 10.

  141. 141.

    P.G. and J.H. v. the United Kingdom, Application no. 44787/98, Judgment of 25 September 2001, para 57.

  142. 142.

    Donohue 2006. See, e.g., Khan v. United Kingdom, Application no. 35394/97, Judgment of 12 May 2000.

  143. 143.

    Taylor 2002a, p. 73.

  144. 144.

    Ibid., p. 76.

  145. 145.

    See, for further discussion, the Memorandum by Victoria Williams for the House of Lords Constitution Committee inquiry into the impact of surveillance and data collection upon the privacy of citizens, available at: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200809/ldselect/ldconst/18/8051402.htm. Accessed 20 February 2014. Victoria Williams is also the author of the Surveillance and Intelligence Law Handbook. Oxford University Press, 2006.

  146. 146.

    CCTV code of practice 2008, p. 10.

  147. 147.

    Artificial-intelligence is defined as “the art of creating machines that perform functions that require intelligence when performed by people”. Kurzweil 1990, p. 14.

  148. 148.

    Sound intensity is the amount of sound energy per unit area. The basic units are either watts/m2 or watts/cm2. Sound intensity level is measured in decibels (dB). Decibels measure the ratio of a given sound intensity I to the threshold of hearing. The threshold of hearing is assigned a sound level of 0 decibels, which corresponds to an intensity of 10−12 watts/m2. A sound that is 10 times more intense (10−11 watts/m2) is assigned a sound level of 10 dB, and so on. see “sound intensity”, Encyclopedia Britannica 2009, Encyclopedia Britannica Online, 11 Nov. 2009, available at: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/555343/sound-intensity; “sound”, Encyclopedia Britannica 2009, Encyclopedia Britannica Online, 11 November 2009, available at: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/555255/sound. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  149. 149.

    Note that the distance between the source and the microphones plays a role.

  150. 150.

    Using a Velleman DVM 805 sound level metre, I measured the ‘normal’ conversation of two colleagues in a quiet office setting for 2 min. The metre was placed at around 2 m from the source. While no one was arguing or shouting, the sound levels still reached up to 70 dBA on several occasions. Note: dBA is the metre’s use of an “A” filter, which is used to match more precisely what the human ear actually hears by “A-weighting” the decibel measurements.

  151. 151.

    CCTV code of practice 2008, p. 7.

  152. 152.

    Surette 2005, p. 155.

  153. 153.

    Borland and Slack 2008.

  154. 154.

    Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, Part II, Section 28 (3).

  155. 155.

    As a result, proposals to amend RIPA, in order to restrict the ability of local authorities to use CCTV surveillance systems for trivial purposes and to provide for judicial approval in relation to certain authorizations and notices under RIPA, were introduced to Parliament on 11 February 2011 in a bill, titled the “Protection of Freedoms Bill 2010–11”.

  156. 156.

    Draft Opinion on Video Surveillance and the Protection of Human Rights, adopted by the Venice Commission at its 70th Plenary Session, Venice, Italy, 16–17 March 2007, para 81.

  157. 157.

    Constitution Committee—Second Report, Surveillance: Citizens and the State (Session 2008–2009), Chapter 4, para 219, available at: http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.com/pa/ld200809/ldselect/ldconst/18/1802.htm. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  158. 158.

    See Taylor 2002a, pp. 82–83.

  159. 159.

    Taylor 2002a, p. 83.

  160. 160.

    Surette 2005.

  161. 161.

    See “Peeping tom CCTV workers jailed” (BBC News, 13 January 2006), available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/4609746.stm. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  162. 162.

    Shouting “help” or “fire”, in order to intentionally trigger the CCTV cameras without justification, should accordingly be prohibited.

  163. 163.

    A software agent is any software that exhibits any character commonly associated with agency, such as reactive, proactive, goal orientated, deliberative, communicative and adaptive (Schermer 2007). Software agents with reactive abilities or characteristics “employ any type and number of sensors to sense its environment. The software can react to sensory input using its actuators” (Schermer 2007, p. 22).

  164. 164.

    Thurston 2008.

  165. 165.

    See, for further discussion, Schermer 2007.

  166. 166.

    Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (30.12.2008), Article 7. Article 9 of the EC’s proposal for a Directive on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data for law enforcement purposes (COM (2012) 10 final, Brussels, 25.1.2012) prohibits measures based solely on the automated processing of personal data, if not authorised by law and subject to appropriate safeguards (in line with Article 7 of CFD 2008/977/JHA).

  167. 167.

    Kim et al. 2007, p. 389.

  168. 168.

    See “Phone Pest picked targets on security video” (The Telegraph, 7 June 1996).

  169. 169.

    Taylor 2002b, p. 107.

  170. 170.

    Proposals to amend RIPA, in order to restrict the ability of local authorities to use CCTV surveillance systems for trivial purposes and to provide for judicial approval in relation to certain authorizations and notices under RIPA, were introduced to Parliament on 11 February 2011 in a bill, titled the “Protection of Freedoms Bill 2010–11”. The bill also calls for the appointment of a Surveillance Camera Commissioner and introduces a code of practice for surveillance camera systems. As of October 2011, the bill has only just entered into the report stage in the House of Commons.

  171. 171.

    Taylor 2002a, p. 81.

  172. 172.

    HyperSonic Sound technology, developed by American Technology Corporation, provides the ability to direct sound to a specific area or target, similar to light, using ultrasonic sound energy. American Technology Corporation, available at: http://www.atcsd.com/site/content/view/34/47/.

  173. 173.

    “Talking CCTV brings voice of authority to streets”, Home Office, 4 April 2007, available at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/about-us/news/talking-cctv.

  174. 174.

    Crime and Disorder Act 1998; Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003.

  175. 175.

    “‘Better CCTV needed’ for ID match” (BBC News, 11 May 2006), available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4761519.stm. Accessed 20 February 2014.

  176. 176.

    ICx Technologies, Inc., http://www.icxt.com/products/icx-surveillance/thermal-imaging/illuminator/.

  177. 177.

    LRADs are already being deployed in the US by police for crowd control purposes and this recent development has rightfully caused an outrage. see “Sheriff's Department Responds To Sonic Device Outrage” (10news.com, 15 September 2009), available at: http://www.10news.com/news/20931535/detail.html. LRADs were most recently deployed and used by police for protests during the G20 Pittsburgh Summit.

  178. 178.

    Schermer 2007, p. 22.

  179. 179.

    Schermer 2007.

  180. 180.

    Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (30.12.2008), Article 7.

  181. 181.

    Goold 2006.

  182. 182.

    Cockfield 2003.

  183. 183.

    Goold 2006.

  184. 184.

    As Norris and Armstrong 1999 point out, evidence has increasingly shown that CCTV control room operators are already using the surveillance capabilities of CCTV cameras in a racial discriminatory manner. See Norris and Armstrong 1999, pp. 110–111.

References

  • Bannister J, Fyfe N, Kearns A (1998) Closed circuit television and the city. In: Norris C, Moran J, Armstrong G (eds) Surveillance, closed circuit television and social control. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 21–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Borland S, Slack J (2008) March of the dustbin Stasi: Half of councils use anti-terror laws to watch people putting rubbish out on the wrong day (The Daily Mail, 1 Nov 2008). http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1082225/March-dustbin-Stasi-Half-councilsuse-anti-terror-laws-watch-people-putting-rubbish-wrong-day.html. Accessed 20 Feb 2014

  • Camber R (2008) Big brother is NOT watching you: Cash-strapped towns leave CCTV cameras unmonitored” (Daily Mail, 16 Dec 2008). http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1095609/Big-brother-NOT-watching-Cash-strapped-towns-leave-CCTV-camerasunmonitored.html. Accessed 20 Feb 2014.

  • Cannataci JA (2010) Squaring the circle of smart surveillance and privacy. In: Proceedings of the 2010 fourth international conference on digital society, IEEE Computer Society

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockfield AI (2003) Who watches the watchers? A law and technology perspective on Government and private sector surveillance. Queen’s Law J 29:364–407

    Google Scholar 

  • Donohue LK (2006) Anglo-American privacy and surveillance. J Crim Law Criminol 96(3):1059–1208

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault M (1980) Power/knowledge: selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977. Pantheon, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill M, Spriggs A, Allen J, Argomaniz J, Bryan J, Jessiman P, Kara D, Kilworth J, Little R, Swain D (2005) The impact of CCTV: fourteen case studies, Home Office Online Report 15/05

    Google Scholar 

  • Goold BJ (2006) Open to all—regulating open street CCTV and the case for symmetrical surveillance. Crim Justice Ethics 25:3–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris DO, O’Boyle K, Warbrick C (1995) Law of the European Convention on Human Rights. Sweet and Maxwell, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Haris J (2014) Most people ignore talking CCTV, CCTV Core News. http://www.cctvcore.co.uk. Accessed 20 Feb 2014

  • Hubbard RW, Magotiaux S, Sullivan M (2004) The state use of closed circuit TV: is there a reasonable expectation of privacy in public. Crim Law Q 49(2):222–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickley M, CCTV helps solve just ONE crime per 1,000 as officers fail to use film as evidence (The Daily Mail, 25 Aug 2009). http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1208700/CCTV-helps-solve-just-ONE-crime-1-000-officers-fail-use-film-evidence.html. Accessed 20 Feb 2014

  • Kim Y, Lee SW, Lee DH, Kim J, Lee MW (2007) Sound detection as an aid to increase detectability of CCTV in surveillance system. In: Aykin N (ed) Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on usability and internationalization, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4560. Springer, Berlin, pp 382–389

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurzweil R (1990) The age of intelligent machines. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Long EV (1967) The intruders: the invasion of privacy by government and industry. Praeger, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald K (2009) CCTV cameras ‘listen for trouble’ (BBC News, 13 Feb 2009). http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/7886656.stm. Accessed 20 Feb 2014

  • Mazerolle LG, Watkins C, Rogan D, Fran J (1999) Random gunfire problems and gunshot detection systems. National Institute of Justice, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Monmonier MS (2004) Spying with maps: surveillance technologies and the future of privacy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreham NA (2006) Privacy in public places. Camb Law J 65:606–635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris C, Armstrong G (1999) The maximum surveillance society: the rise of CCTV. Berg Publishers, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Orwell G (1949) Nineteen eighty-four. Secker and Warburg, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Pienaar J (2006) Olympics audio surveillance row (BBC News, 26 Nov, 2006). http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6186348.stm. Accessed 20 Feb 2014.

  • Rempell S (2006) Privacy, personal data and subject access rights in the European data directive and implementing UK statute: Durant v. financial services authority as a paradigm of data protection nuances and emerging dilemmas. Florida J Int Law 18:807–842

    Google Scholar 

  • Schermer BW (2007) Software agents, surveillance, and the right to privacy: a legislative framework for agent-enabled surveillance. Leiden University Press, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith G (2004) Behind the screens: examining constructions of deviance and informal practices among CCTV control room operators in the UK. Surveill Soc 2(2/3):376–395

    Google Scholar 

  • Surette R (2005) The thinking eye: pros and cons of second generation CCTV surveillance systems. Policing: Int J Police Strat Manage 28(1):152–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor N (2002a) State surveillance and the right to privacy. Surveill Soc 1(1):66–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor N (2002b) You’ve been framed: the regulation of CCTV surveillance. J Civil Liberties 7(2):83–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson I. (2005) Council listens into Soho crowds (Vnunet, 4 May 2005). http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2127273/council-listens-soho-crowds

  • Thomson I. “Westminster pulls CCTV microphones (Vnunet, 31 Jan 2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurston R (2008) CCTV cameras that listen as well as watch (SC Magazine, 25 June 2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • van Reijendam W (2008) English Bobbies can escape the normal life by listening to aggression detection (Financieel Dagblad, 13 May 2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Welsh BC, Farrington DP (2003/2004) Surveillance for crime prevention in public space: results and policy choices in Britain and America. Criminol Public Policy 3(4):497–526

    Google Scholar 

  • Willman J (2007) Talking cameras are just the start (Financial Times, 7 Apr 2007), Ed1, p 9

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Demetrius Klitou

Authors
  1. Demetrius Klitou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Demetrius Klitou .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 T.M.C. Asser Press and the author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Klitou, D. (2014). Public Space CCTV Microphones and Loudspeakers: The Ears and Mouth of “Big Brother”. In: Privacy-Invading Technologies and Privacy by Design. Information Technology and Law Series, vol 25. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-026-8_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation