[gambiting]

In Germany you can have a dashcam and it can be recording all the time, but any and all video recorded by it is inadmissable in court, and you can't share it online without bluring out faces and licence plates. So it's a bit useless. You can have it if you want to record for the sake of it.

[lotsofpulp]

Any and all video is inadmissible? In criminal and civil court?

Even if it shows someone intentionally hurting someone? Or someone trying to pretend to be hurt or pretend to be a victim and defraud someone else?

[Mashimo]

I think his statement is based on pre-2018 law. I quickly read up on it, and I understood it as that it can be used in curt. But you are not allowed to permanently record everything. A record buffer that overwrites itself is ok though.

But even as a native German speaker. It's hard to understand what exactly is allowed and what not.

https://www.finanztip.de/dashcam-urteil/ https://www.adac.de/verkehr/recht/verkehrsvorschriften-deuts...

[sn_master]

> A record buffer that overwrites itself is ok though.

That makes sense now.

[boomboomsubban]

Though I don't know the specifics about dash cams in Germany, evidence proving guilt being inadmissible isn't exactly rare.

[Mashimo]

Ah yes. Thank you for the correction. That also stops people from driving around and "playing cop"

[strogonoff]

I’m curious as to why that’s considered bad. I imagine there must be a reason, but from where I am some locations on this planet could really benefit from people literally driving around and filming rampant traffic violations, with law enforcement making use of it.

Is this a forward-looking law that presumes such video evidence may be faked in an undetectable way? Or is there really an expectation of privacy even while you are in a public place (e.g., street)?

[Mashimo]

I just looked it up. It appears the "stop people from playing cop" was my interpretation.

It is all about privacy.

Germany has very strict privacy laws. Probably because of our recent history in East Germany and the Stasi who systematic monitored the people. Similar to the NSA, but the state collapsed and people could read their own record. And a bit more "personal" because people where extorted to spy on their own friends and family. Movie suggestion: "Das Leben der Anderen" / "the lives of others"

You also can't film / take photo of people in public or put a camera in front of your house if it has view of the public street.

[strogonoff]

Thanks for clarifying. I watched that film (though a long time ago), and I’m familiar with the issue. In my mind, coordinated surveillance by the state or any single entity is highly undesirable, but is a different concern. Surely if one can be held liable for, e.g., using a visible act of filming in an attempt to make someone [physically stronger or better equipped] stop breaking the law, one may end up feeling fairly powerless in a variety of situations.

[sn_master]

It's about the potential for abuse. The police can use it as an excuse to charge or arrest you when they don't have anything else on you.

Most of the places with really bad traffic situation (e.g. India) already have cameras and infinite footage of violations, and they don't have any impact on law enforcement.

[strogonoff]

India aside, surely if you get arrested for actually breaking a law that’d be net good for society? Whether law enforcement wants you for an unrelated offence doesn’t matter; they won’t be able to charge you on that (if they had enough evidence, they’d have already done so).