UK court fines national $137,000 for Ring doorbell

According to The Guardian, John Woodard installed a Ring doorbell camera on the front of his house and another surveillance camera overlooking a side yard to deter burglars after a series of car break-ins. However, Woodard did not report these cameras to his neighbor, Dr. Mary Fairhurst. Fairhurst reported that she was "alarmed and shocked" when she realized that Woodard was storing recordings of her voice on her smartphone. Fairhurst eventually moved out of her home after there was an argument between them over the cameras.

Judge Melissa Clarke of Oxford County Court ruled that Woodard had breached the UK General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Act 2018, which states that "owners and occupants of domestic premises must be consulted if the domestic premises border the intended viewing area." Clark also ruled that the video and audio captured by Ring's doorbell and cameras were personal Mary Fairhurst and that her neighbor's security devices contributed to the harassment.

For his part, Woodard claims the sole purpose of installing the cameras was to deter potential burglars. His total fine could be as much as £100,000, or nearly $137,000.

Amazon told the Guardian that it urges its customers to respect the privacy of their neighbours and "comply with all applicable laws" when using Ring products. Ring cameras do have privacy settings, such as the ability to disable audio recording, as well as a Motion Zones feature that allows you to choose which areas of the camera preview to use when recording.

Source: theguardian, gizmodo

Illustration: amazon