Privacy

1172 readers

1 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

172

Judge: Amazon “cannot claim shock” that bathroom spycams were used as advertised (arstechnica.com)

submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Tech legal expert Eric Goldman wrote that a victory for the plaintiff could be considered "a dangerous ruling for the spy cam industry and for Amazon," because "the court’s analysis could indicate that all surreptitious hook cameras are categorically illegal to sell." That could prevent completely legal uses of cameras designed to look like clothes hooks, Goldman wrote, such as hypothetical in-home surveillance uses.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 15 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Amazon's Product Safety Team specifically inspected the camera to "ensure" that Amazon wasn't platforming a product being used to “infringe privacy,” “surreptitiously record others for sexual purposes,” or “create and store child sex abuse material.” That review allegedly did not prevent the spy cam from being used to do just that, the lawsuit alleged, putting consumers at risk of alleged harms suffered by the plaintiff

I didn't know this was a service Amazon performed, but I guess they don't really...

[–] [email protected] 10 points 11 months ago

✓ It's a camera.
✓ It's hidden.
✓ It's best hidden in places where people take off their clothes.

Yep, no way anyone could use that for sexual abuse.