-4

Public transportation comapany in our city has recently installed monitors in its vehicles and from time to time monitors are used as digial mirrors: digital video from the video cameras in the vehicle are relayed in monitors. The video quality is not high and it really resembles video signal that comes from the video surveillance systems (angle, slow motions, skewed images) but company insists that it separates systems and videos from it surveillance systems are classified as secret but videos from the s. c. "digital mirrors" (which resembles surveillance results anyway) are published.

So - how legally it is to use such digital mirros? I find such relaying of low quality and disturbed videos to be humiliating and I would like to sue the company but are there legal norms that prohibits the use of digital mirros (especially in humiliating ways) or that governs the quality of digital mirrors?

The mentioned country is under continental (german) law system.

  • -1. Moralising about the entirely subjective idea that video displayed on low quality is somehow humiliation, is irrelevant to the question of law and legality of displaying such video. – Nij Feb 4 '17 at 2:46
  • Are you asking "is it legal to take a low-resolution photograph of a person"? What do you mean by "digital mirror"? What do you mean by "relayed in monitors" – do you mean displayed on a monitor? How do you know? Where are the monitors? There are tons of facts left out, out of those needed to make sense of this as a legal question. – user6726 Feb 4 '17 at 5:14
1

It is legal to take photos/videos from anywhere you have permission from the controller to do so - the bus company presumably gives themselves permission to take photos on their own buses.

It is legal to do whatever you like with your own photos including displaying them on a monitor (subject to any illegality in the subject itself e.g. Child pornography).

If you don't want to be in the photo you can choose not to ride the bus.

| improve this answer | |
  • I think that it is immoral to display distorted and humiliating images. If it is still legal then this is one more example when legal validity is immoral and therefore bigger changes in society are necessary. – TomR Feb 4 '17 at 0:47
  • 2
    I think it is perfectly moral and one more example of how the law supports community freedoms – Dale M Feb 4 '17 at 2:09

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.