If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
What is the California law regarding dash cam time & placard & location limits?
On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 07:45:55 +0000 (UTC), Tegger wrote:
> California is a "two party consent" state. These are the dozen all-party consent states: California Connecticut Delaware Florida Illinois Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Montana New Hampshire Pennsylvania Washington But, what I want to know is how the 30-second rule is supposed to work. Does that mean that I can record, essentially forever, but, after a "triggering event" (i.e., an accident), I can then only record for a further 30 seconds? Or, does it mean the "loop" has to be a 30-second loop? What does it mean that California law stipulates: "Video event recorders shall store no more than 30 seconds before and after a triggering event." |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
What is the California law regarding dash cam time & placard& location limits?
Jessie Williams wrote:
> Ann Marie Brest > wrote: > >> (C) Video event recorders shall store no more than 30 seconds >> before and after a triggering event. > > What's the rationale for the 30 second limitation? > Probably because they don't want to chance the system looping around and erasing any of the footage. Of course it would also limit the ability to discover how long it actually takes for help to arrive. -- Steve W. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
What is the California law regarding dash cam time & placard& location limits?
On 4/22/14 2:45 AM, Tegger wrote:
> richard > wrote in > : > >> >> As for recording audio, it's my damn vehicle. If I want to record >> audio I don't need to tell the passengers. >> > > > > California is a "two party consent" state. That means that both parties to > the recording (one of them being you) must be informed of the fact that > they are being recorded. > > A "one party consent" state will mandate that only one of the parties to > the recording must be informed. And that one party would be you. > > Failure to notify both parties in a "two party consent" state usually > results in the recording being inadmissible in court, and you can be sued > for failure to notify. > > You can Google this. And if you do, you should find per CA penal code section 631 that this applies to recording telephone conversations. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
What is the California law regarding dash cam time & placard & location limits?
On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 09:23:17 -0700, bob mullen wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 07:45:55 +0000 (UTC), Tegger wrote: > >> California is a "two party consent" state. > > These are the dozen all-party consent states: > California > Connecticut > Delaware > Florida > Illinois > Maryland > Massachusetts > Michigan > Montana > New Hampshire > Pennsylvania > Washington > > But, what I want to know is how the 30-second rule is > supposed to work. > > Does that mean that I can record, essentially forever, but, > after a "triggering event" (i.e., an accident), I can then > only record for a further 30 seconds? > > Or, does it mean the "loop" has to be a 30-second loop? > > What does it mean that California law stipulates: > "Video event recorders shall store no more than 30 seconds > before and after a triggering event." You don't understand what this means? The camera is always recording.as you drive. When the event happens, a second file is generated that contains the 30 seconds before and after. I had a camera that would record up to 8 hours. At the end of 8 hours, that file is deleted and a new one begins. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
What is the California law regarding dash cam time & placard &location limits?
Ashton Crusher > wrote:
> the law itself first defines what a video event recorder is and > you don't have one. That is an interesting insight, and, if it holds, it may be how a user can get around the 30-second limit. I guess the question is whether a basic sd-card camera like this one is a "video event recorder" or not??????? http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-dash-cam/ |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
What is the California law regarding dash cam time & placard &location limits?
richard > wrote:
> With today's technology, I can mount a camera practically anywhere in a > vehicle I want and you'd never know it was there. That brings up an interesting legal technicality. If the camera is /NOT/ mounted *TO* the windshield, is it still required, by law, to do 30-second loops only? |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
What is the California law regarding dash cam time & placard &location limits?
bob mullen wrote, on Mon, 21 Apr 2014 13:07:05 -0700:
> I'm told there is a law in California that "allows" dash > cams, but that there are specific "requirements". Apparently it's not so easy to find a good dash cam nowadays. http://jalopnik.com/why-is-it-so-har...-cam-473093375 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
What is the California law regarding dash cam time & placard & location limits?
On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 18:40:18 -0400, richard wrote:
> You don't understand what this means? > The camera is always recording.as you drive. > When the event happens, a second file is generated that contains the 30 > seconds before and after. I still don't understand the 30 second rule. I understood what you said, which was that there is a *second* file, created at an accident, of one minute duration, consisting of 30 seconds before and 30 seconds after. But, why not just keep the *original* file (of any duration) and just add the 30 seconds after the accident? That is, why create 2 files of the same event? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
What is the California law regarding dash cam time & placard & location limits?
Jessie Williams wrote:
> Ann Marie Brest > wrote: > >> (C) Video event recorders shall store no more than 30 seconds >> before and after a triggering event. > > What's the rationale for the 30 second limitation? Possibly this: >(D) The registered owner or lessee of the vehicle may disable the device. > >(E) The data recorded to the device is the property of the registered owner >or lessee of the vehicle. It appears as though the law is set up to protect the rights and privacy of the owner/lessee of the vehicle. Particularly if the unit is installed by some other party (manufacturer, insurance company, etc.). They don't want hours of non event related recordings available to other parties. And the recordings triggered by the event belong to the owner/lessee. So the question is: If its my car, I'm driving it and I'm OK with longer than a +/- 30 second window, is that OK? Also, signs warning passengers about recording probably deal with the audio recording capabilities and two party consent rules. No audio and the camera is pointing out the windshield? Probably no sign required. -- Paul Hovnanian Have gnu, will travel. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
What is the California law regarding dash cam time & placard & location limits?
>> the law itself first defines what a video event recorder is and
>> you don't have one. > > That is an interesting insight, and, if it holds, it may be how > a user can get around the 30-second limit. > > I guess the question is whether a basic sd-card camera like this > one is a "video event recorder" or not??????? > > http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-dash-cam/ Without further info, I'd interpret the law as setting out specific requirements for Video Event Recorders, which may be installed by car manufacturers, insurance companies, and employers. Cameras that DO NOT meet these requirements (even if it's only the 30-second requirement) are NOT Video Event Recorders and may not be installed by third parties. I'm assuming that there is no other law saying that a vehicle owner can't have a camera at all that this law is trying to make an exception to. If you want a camera and some law seems to be intent on making it illegal to block your view of your own car hood, consider putting it somewhere else. On the roof. On the front grill next to your headlights. On the wheels (but don't call them "upskirt cameras" even if they could be aimed that way). On the front side of your outside mirrors. Mounted on the bottom of the engine and pointed forward (but watch out for the camera getting clobbered by bumps in the road. If the driver can't see it, it can't be blocking his vision. Just be sure the camera is in a place where it cannot easily be stolen. I heard this same logic being used in another area of law. Some anal-retentive company representative started giving people a lecture on how to properly use the trademark of his product, even in casual conversation. Someone else objected that the improperly-used version (I believe it was using it as a noun instead of an adjective) is not a trademark and he could misuse it as much as he wanted. In any case, everyone but said company representative was using the name of the product in casual conversation, not for commercial purposes, was referring to the company's product, not an imitation, and didn't appreciate the nit-picking from someone who was trying to sell them something. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Attention terrorists: Now is the perfect time to target theliberals in Los Angeles California | Stop-IL-TollwayRipoffs | Driving | 64 | October 7th 12 06:11 AM |
Attention terrorists: Now is the perfect time to target the liberalsin Los Angeles California | Tom $herman (-_-) | Driving | 0 | October 4th 12 02:00 AM |