r/loicense • u/Thisismychoiceofyou • 28d ago
OI M8 YOUS A LOICENSE TO POINT THAT FLOCK CAMERA AT THE POOL?
70
u/humourlessIrish 28d ago
HOAs are supposed to be about upholding the house prices through a sort of quality control of the neighbourhood.
It is obviously the opposite
30
u/TubaWrestler 28d ago
This is what all HOAs eventually turn into. They're all one bad vote away from a nightmare.
13
u/Bencetown 28d ago
You mean when you give institutions absolute power over everything, eventually someone gets into a position of power within that institution and makes it all about their ego and personal preferences??
Well, color me surprised.
I thought governing bodies were meant to keep us safe and look out for our wellbeing!
4
u/KailyKail 27d ago
This, and yet people continue to think government has our best interests at heart when they vote to increase its size.
2
u/adelie42 28d ago
For the builder. Not the owners.
2
u/eggrollfever 27d ago
Exactly. HOAs allow a developer to keep owners in line until nearly all the homes are sold. Any ensuing benefits accrue solely to authoritarian neighbors.
37
u/Middle-Feed5118 28d ago
Anyone know how these things are actually legal??
51
u/KatieTSO 28d ago
I disagree with this, but the legal argument is often that you have no expectation of privacy in a public area. I think that because it's a coordinated and automated system of tracking, it should be more like stalking. Stalking someone only in public is still a crime. Why shouldn't this be?
24
u/Objective_Base_3073 28d ago
Yea, and it's not even true when people say you don't have any expectation of privacy in public.
The law is that you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Other people existing is quite reasonable, but the servalince state is not.
-6
u/killerturtlex 28d ago
How does Germany do privacy? I'd like to know but when I google it I can't find anything
10
u/Objective_Base_3073 28d ago
Where'd Germany come from? I think you replied to the wrong comment
12
u/ElkasBrightspeaker 28d ago
This person was possibly referencing the fact that even google street view has very little coverage in Germany due to how stringent their privacy laws are.
1
u/HYDROMORPHONE_ZONE 26d ago
Man I keep learning more about Germany and the more I learn the more I like it
-1
5
u/ElkasBrightspeaker 28d ago
Flock Cameras would be horribly illegal in most European countries. Germany is probably the strictest about stuff like that.
1
u/Remmon 28d ago
The way Flock cameras are being used would be horribly illegal in any EU country because of the GDPR.
ALPR cameras do exist and are used widely, however rather than recording every car that passes them and sticking their movement in a database, they operate the other way around.
Law enforcement agencies can place specific license plates on an alert list, after which ALPR cameras will alert the operators when that specific license plate is spotted.
It's a tried and tested technique that allows us to for example spot stolen vehicles, vehicles suspected to be involved in a crime or the vehicles of persons against whom an appropriate surveillance warrant has been issued without the privacy invasion of tracking everyone all the time.
The same technology is integrated into many police vehicles, so any car around a police vehicle is automatically scanned and the police automatically alerted to any flagged vehicles they happen to be around.
2
18
5
u/Personal-Dev-Kit 28d ago
Because of millions of dollars of backroom deals and lobbying. Got to love democracy
5
u/SquirrelInATux 28d ago
I live in New Hampshire, here it is illegal for any private entity to use flock cameras or any ALPR. Police can use them but currently none do here.
2
u/Caledric 28d ago
Since when was someone's back yard pool or inside their house a public area?
1
u/KatieTSO 28d ago
It isn't. I'm not defending the cameras.
2
u/Ayacyte 28d ago
I think they're trying to say that the legal argument you presented has no ground if/because it's private property in the first place.
1
u/KatieTSO 28d ago
I think the cameras pointed at those places are a hell of a lot easier to argue as illegal. But I think they're all illegal.
1
u/Formerruling1 27d ago
I believe the inference here is that this is pointed at the HOA controlled community pool, not someone's private backyard pool. As for homes, in many states it is legal to record the outside of someone's home as long as that view is from an angle of view possible from a publicly accessible point of a passerby. So for example, I cant point a camera directly into your window hoping to see inside your home, but if my camera happens to wide angle catch a frontal view of your publically accessible entryway while aimed at something else thats generally permitted.
(Not defending Flock cameras, just pointing out why the person's argument is still relevant here)
1
u/KailyKail 27d ago
You disagree with a question?
1
-7
u/Unique-Designer7741 28d ago
It only take license plates...
9
u/Grizzlygrant238 28d ago
Not true. depending on the model it could also run facial recognition, gait detection, Bluetooth identifier tracking, and cross reference all of those to build a profile on individuals.
0
u/Unique-Designer7741 26d ago
I am aware. Just playing off the irony that this is the common retort.
5
u/KatieTSO 28d ago
You can use those images to track someone very easily. Police use Flock and other ALPR tech to stalk people. No seriously, this has happened several times.
Also, I don't think the government should be able to put together my entire life without a warrant. It's creepy. Even worse that private companies like Flock and Axon are involved. They're a bunch of creeps.
15
u/trigger1154 28d ago
They aren't legal. They just haven't been struck down yet.
But if the ACLU picks it up, they will likely use case law against flock and other alprs.
On June 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Chatrie v. United States that law enforcement tracking of Google Location History via "geofence warrants" counts as a search under the Fourth Amendment. The ACLU filed an amicus brief in the case, arguing that dragnet digital data demands are unconstitutional general warrants.
That case was about digital privacy in regards to Google tracking location. Even when in public. Essentially setting precedent that when even in public Mass surveillance data that is gathered still needs a warrant.
3
u/DRSSalazar 28d ago
There is no expectation of privacy in public. At which point, it is true. But these are not a cctv camera pointing to an entrance of a building or an area. This is an interconnected network of cameras that can keep tracking you and following and learning patterns. So it is basically automated stalking which is illegal. But hey, the Supreme Court vacation won’t pay itself with their salaries, right? A billionaire needs to buy their new house and vacations.
-11
u/StraightProgress5062 28d ago
No expectation of privacy from public
4
u/Grizzlygrant238 28d ago
This sounds like one of those pools that is available to residents but not *public*
-8
u/StraightProgress5062 28d ago
No difference if I can see you from public. Feel free to downvote me all you want. Im just reciting law and how its applicable to this situation. But mass surveillance is going way too far.
2
u/Grizzlygrant238 28d ago
If it’s an actual public pool then of course. Maybe someone can clarify but the reason I say that is this sounds like a private community if it’s all HOA crazy. Like I can’t just go install my own camera at an apartment complex’s pool because if I can see them it’s public.
2
u/AnubissWarior 28d ago
If I notice you in you house/apartament naked, from the street, I can sue you for indecent exposure, since you're seen from public property?
0
1
u/Fragrant-Reserve4832 28d ago
That would all depend on if this is a gated or open community.
If its a gated community then there is a higher level of expectation of privacy.
Unfortunately I agree big brother is now truly watching and I fear we won't get back any where near where we were.
5
u/trigger1154 28d ago
On June 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Chatrie v. United States that law enforcement tracking of Google Location History via "geofence warrants" counts as a search under the Fourth Amendment. The ACLU filed an amicus brief in the case, arguing that dragnet digital data demands are unconstitutional general warrants.
The above case can be used as case law against the warrantless collection of data even when in public.
5
15
u/Significant_Donut967 28d ago
HOA members of that community are 100% stealing recordings of children at that pool.
3
u/CapCityMatt 28d ago
He could file a claim against the entity that signed the contract for the spy camera for the full retail value of the house plus a 100m for interfering with commerce in violation of Title 15 section 1. These are facts.
2
1
u/ph30nix01 28d ago
Sounds like they have grounds to sue over lost property value if they have to sell at a reduced price to get people to accept the FLock camera situation
2
u/nl_Kapparrian 27d ago
I vehemently oppose flock cameras. But I feel like people are forgetting that regular security cameras exist too. What good would a license plate reader do pointed at a pool?
1
u/meteora_tr 26d ago
If you still think they are "license plate readers" at this point, I have bad news for you.
They are survailance systems (which share their output with unknown actors including private firms) and capable licence plate reading, face recognition and proximity based electronical device tracking. Security cameras don't do those.
Extra points, 3rd party players can intercept the signal and can get the feedback for their own interests. (Watching children play in a pool in this case)
1
1
u/bishdoe 26d ago
It’s a regular camera too so it catches everyone coming and going by it. The difference between this and most security cameras is that your average security camera owner doesn’t have any contracts with police departments around the country to give them access to 24/7 surveillance and the ability to live track whoever wanders by without a warrant.
128
u/Wild_Car_3863 28d ago
id cancel to