Amazon and Uber Eats Drivers Capturing Residents in Photos: Invasion of Privacy?

[notinthegovt]

hi,

i’ve been staying at a friend’s apartment for a few days, working from the couch which faces the windows. nearly every day, an Amazon or Uber Eats driver rushes up the stairs, peering through the window as they look for the right apartment. we often lock eyes, creating an awkward moment. then they place the delivery down, step back, and snap a photo. i find this extremely unsettling.

i’m in a private residence, yet the chance of me appearing in a photo has significantly increased. considering how Live Photos work on smartphones, the camera is essentially recording everything it sees until the photo is taken. also to note nefarious use and wide angle lenses… does anyone else find this invasive? how and why are Amazon and Uber Eats allowed to carry out such practices?

[raverbashing]

If your want privacy put up a curtain, they're just doing their job

[notinthegovt]

great recommendation; i didn’t think of that. putting up a curtain and sitting in darkness to avoid privacy. living in California, this is considered an invasion of privacy. California’s “invasion of privacy” statute (Penal Code Section 647(j)).

[codingdave]

Are you referring to 647(j)(1), 647(j)(2), 647(j)(3), or 647(j)(4)?

You really might want to re-read the code. It isn't as applicable to your story as you seem to feel:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...

[raverbashing]

Thanks for the link

647j even contains the provision "with the intent to invade the privacy of a person or persons inside"

Doesn't look like this is what's happening here

Also "putting up a curtain and sitting in darkness" because a light control or light mesh curtain blocks 100% of light, sure

[_8j50]

When i used them in the past i was forced to meet them many times and they took pictures of me at like 2am looking like a crazy person walking away with a bag of taco bell or something many times.

No invasion of privacy for me so long as the pic they took could have been taken by passerbys or neighbor's security camera. I am more concerned about ring sharing shit with the cops than the uber guy's phone.

[notinthegovt]

ha. as my friend says, “as long as it’s a flattering picture of me, snap away!” however, i don’t share the same sentiment.

[whatsup7123]

They record video? I though they just take a photo of the package that they dropped off at your doorstep.

[c420]

I believe he's referring to how, at least on Android, when taking a photo it doesn't save only when the button is pressed. It continuously records starting when the camera is opened and then uses an algo to determine which is the best frame to use.

[whatsup7123]

In this case this is a legitimate problem. There are many apartments where the density of units and/or layout of windows is such that "peering in" is possible. Delivery companies need to adjust their policies to protect privacy.

[notinthegovt]

i understand you’re pointing out that they might just be taking a photo of the package for delivery confirmation. however, the ambiguity is what concerns me. when someone aims a camera at my house, i can’t know for sure what they’re capturing. they could be interested in how i look, what sensitive information is displayed on my computer screens, what i’m watching on tv, what’s inside my house, or even why there’s a large sum of money on the table. last time i checked, i couldn’t tell if they were shooting a photo, a video, in wide-angle, or macro mode, or what the camera was even focusing on. that’s unsettling, and it shouldn’t have to be my concern.