|
|
|
|
|
|
by cthalupa
2453 days ago
|
|
|
>“If we ask within 60 days of the recording and as long as it’s been uploaded to the cloud, then Ring can take it out of the cloud and send it to us legally so that we can use it as part of our investigation,” he said." Just because someone says something doesn't mean it's true: >"The reports that police can obtain any video from a Ring doorbell within 60 days is false," a spokesperson said. "Ring will not release customer information in response to government demands without a valid and binding legal demand properly served on us. Ring objects to overbroad or otherwise inappropriate demands as a matter of course. We are working with the Fresno County Sheriff's Office to ensure this is understood." https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/08/police-can-get-y... >"Police have also told CNET in the past that they've shown up at known Ring users' doorsteps to request footage in person if the online requests don't pan out." This is shitty but not a back door, and it's also something police do if you have regular camera footage they think will help with an investigation too. |
|
|
Maybe this was a NSL situation and the cop unintentionally spilled the beans, or maybe it's just weasel words by the amazon PR rep. Technically what they said specifically ("a valid and binding legal demand properly served on us") doesn't necessarily mean anything has to be signed off on by a judge. It just means the police have to make a legal and binding demand which shouldn't be a problem if handing that data over to police whenever they demand it is part of the binding terms of their contract with police.
I'll admit I'm not giving amazon or the police the benefit of the doubt here, but I also have zero reason to.