- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Dashcam (licensed CC BY-ND-2.0 by Paul Townsend on Flickr).jpgAA chief calls for laws restricting sharing of dashcam footage
AA president Edmund King has suggested that laws should be introduced to restrict the use of dashcam video footage, saying that a “rush to judgment” on social media can lead to innocent motorists being victimised.
Speaking to the Times, he accused some dashcam users of “vehicular voyeurism” when sharing footage on channels such as YouTube.
While he did not call for a ban on the devices, as exists in countries such as Luxembourg, he did appeal to the next government to restrict what could be shown online.
Mr King said: “While most drivers with dashcams fit them to protect themselves from ‘crash for cash’ fraudsters or dangerous drivers, there is an element of vehicular voyeurism from some individuals.
“The AA supports the submitting of camera evidence to the police where it can be assessed and the other party can be asked for their side of the story before action is taken.
“But the lust for footage and the rush to judgment on social media will occasionally make victims of drivers caught out by circumstances, such as diesel spills, black ice, intimidation or trying to avoid another road user.
“Perhaps government needs to look at a privacy charter for use of dashcam material before video vehicular voyeurism gets totally out of hand,” he added.
Besides Luxembourg’s ban, some European countries place restrictions on how footage can be used, such as requiring licence plates to be blurred or the consent of all parties involved to be obtained before footage is shared.
An AA survey found that 15 per cent of its members now use dashcams, and 1 per cent share footage online.
> Video: Dashcam captures frightening moment a London cyclist was doored by van driver
Use of helmet and handlebar-mounted cameras is increasingly prevalent among cyclists, the principal reason being to record instances of dangerous or aggressive driving that they encounter while out on their bikes.
Many police forces in the UK now invite road users including cyclists to submit video of road traffic incidents so that they can be properly investigated.
> Leicestershire Police may invite cyclists to send in video of dangerous passes
We have reported on a number of cases where footage has helped secure the conviction of a driver where it is possible that no prosecution would have happened in the absence of video evidence.
With the AA proposing that the law should be reformed, there could be some concern about cyclists who take video footage that restrictions could be placed on what they are able to post online.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- quiff 0 sec ago
I confess it is relatively new to me. It's psychologically hard to limit yourself to sidelights when everyone else is using headlights though - the...
- quiff 13 min 45 sec ago
I'm sure they'd ask Lime to do that too. Come and collect your bikes and my neighbour - they're in pieces.
- brooksby 19 min 39 sec ago
Ireland seems to have a lot of problems with their cycle lanes… Almost as many as England
- quiff 39 min 23 sec ago
Fair point - I was restricting myself to pedal bikes. As I've never spent that kind of money on anything though (mortgage doesn't count), it's kind...
- brooksby 1 hour 41 min ago
And finally: I wonder how many of the "more than 3,000" signatures on that petition are actually locals, who live or work there (and are not just...
- Doug_D 3 hours 17 min ago
Another book suggestion - I can highly recommend "Lost Summers and Half-Forgotten Afternoons: A Mint Sauce collection" - a beautifully presented...
- chrisonabike 4 hours 30 min ago
But... the last is only not the case with drivers on normal roads because driving on the cycle path / footway / rolling a vehicle up there is seen...
- mdavidford 5 hours 8 min ago
I think you're missing an opportunity to pack even more tech into it - add accelerometers that can detect whether they're pedalling or stepping....
Add new comment
29 comments
I don't like the AA since every year they send me a renewal that is £80 more expensive than if you join online as a new customer. So every year I point this out and they match the online price, hate to think how many people just auto renew on their credit card.
The AA is a commercial organisation which exists to make money. How many AA members have been convicted of motoring offences? How many AA members have killed people with vehicles? of those, how many went to trial? How many were found guilty? how many received a custodial sentence ? what was the average duration of said sentence? Does the AA expel members who have killed? Once the AA openly publish these facts then they might gain a bit more credibility in my book, but then I dont give a toss about profits, I just want everyone to get home safely regardless of how they choose to travel. Peace.
If the drivers are indeed innocent then the footage would show that no? Also the increased use of cameras by us cyclists is because how increasingly badly many drivers drive.
While I sympathise with the position that online public lynching is a problem, I don't think censoring information is the solution.
Dashcam is highly recommended.
Usually Edmund King is quite supportive of cycling, maybe he should have clarified his comments. The AA also are quite pro-cycling, unlike the IAM who I left because of their anti-cycling rhetoric.
As a non-driver who has never been a member of any of them, or paid all that much attention to them, I have to say I actually had a relatively positive impression of the IAM. Always seen them as older, leather-driving-glove-wearing, rule-following types who disapprove of boy-racers. Is that not the case?
Now the ABD (Association of Bad Drivers), on the other hand...
What needs to be remembered here is that with dashcam (or any other footage) you are dealing with images or video recordings which are captured in a public place. I think it would be too difficult to define how a "dashcam" recording differs from other still images or video recorded in a public place. For that reason, I would see it as being difficult to particularly target dashcam footage. FWIW, the footage could just as easily be recorded by a pedestrian passer-by. I also often see photographers and videographers (sometimes TV crews) along my commuting route.
Depending on the jurisdiction you are in, I believe this basically leaves anyone who does not want their actions in traffic recorded and publicised with the option not to do anything that they do not want the world to know about.
If there were cases of drivers being beaten up for mishaps that there were not their fault then I'd agree but public shaming on "social media", in the interests of road safety sounds like a good idea. If a driver knows that their conduct were due to black ice, would they feel ashamed? I don't have a car any more but if someone caught me slipping through a red light, due to black ice, then big deal.
Dash cams aren't illegal in Luxembourg as such. You just need a license (we need one for our office security cameras for too).
Problem is, the police do f*ck all about anything until it goes viral on social media and the world is watching them.
FTFY
Some dashcammers seem to make situations worse on purpose.
Lots of dashcam recordings are of roundabouts, and often the cam car is going too fast or ignores another cars signalling for a good 5 seconds and tries to block them. Other incidents are more likely a genuine one, but should be dealt with by the authorities first.
I drive about 40,000 miles a year, and considered a dashcam, but I realised, you just have to pay more attention than the other idiots and try to de-stress. Also, I don't give two hoots if I am running late, so long as I actually get there in one piece!
There are some benefits. My commuting bike has a GoPro mount fitted to the handlebars. About 3 years ago, I was pulling off at a green light on my morning commute, when another cyclist jumped the red coming from my right and T-boned me. I went down into pedestrians to my left and my front wheel was pretzeled.
The fact that I had a video record of the incident which proved that the light was green for me made the other cyclist extremely cooperative, and willing to cover the costs to replace my front rim.
pure filth.
Isn't it a euphemism for track-standing?
I don't have a dash on my bike, so I'm going to go out on a limb here and say he's not talking about the helmet cam footage of vulnerable road users.
Edmund King is no enemy of cyclists;
http://road.cc/content/news/70594-abuse-cyclists-almost-racial-discrimin...
He's making some valid points here. Video evidence is an incredible boon, especially if it results in a conviction, but I've never been a fan of using that footage for public shaming. Occasinally it can be useful if the authorities decide not to prosecute and then relent after a public outcry. But automatically uploading the slightest infraction (a'la Magnatom) has not made the roads any safer.
Au contraire. It gives an indication of the daily conditions on the roads to cyclists, and refutes the constant refrain that cyclists cause crashes because of their poor cycling. This is a valuable service.
So the roads are safer? I must have the bad luck to be living in the area where public shaming of bad driving hasn't worked.
This ^. I know him personally and he definitely no enemy of cyclists; he's a very decent and measured bloke - and a cyclist himself.
As others have pointed out, he made these comments in general terms. Too many people just can't wait to be offended.
just because he is a "decent bloke" doesnt mean he isnt talking rubbish even in general terms, define the difference between a dashcam, and a mere digital sensor that captures an image 25 frames per second ? is it only digital footage, what about good old fashioned film, does it apply to commercial footage, personal footage, footage captured for non profit sharing, does it only apply in cars, or vehicles in general, do the vehicles have to be moving at the time, whats the difference between someone standing on a pavement filming a streetscene with the exact same equipment as a dashcam that picks up the exact say piece of bad driving and publishes it on youtube, what if the video was of a sunset and incidentally captured an example of bad driving
are photos covered ? its technically still an image of moment in time that was moving albeit a very tiny fragment, would you need to blur the number plates of the car, would you need consent of the owner if it was published on the internet ? will the TopGear/Grand Tour lot ever be able to film driving again ?
these are the kinds of holes you open up when you start trying to apply limitation rules on public spaces when everyone carries at least a device if not more, capable of filming anything and anytime and can instantly publish it globally.
you make laws in haste, you repent about them at leisure. I cannot believe this is is the most pressing issue the AA should be remotely concerned about
Edmund King has done and said a lot of good stuff regarding cyclists and cyclists rights in the past, I think people are being a bit hard on him here.
hes not mentioned cyclists at all btw.
how many videos have we seen (from cyclists or motorists) where the people commenting have ZERO KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHWAY CODE and spread this to other ignorant ranty muppets? This is his target, and it's a just one. Law abiding cyclists are the ones who seem to get the most stick from these idiots, so fair play to Ed for bininging it up.
Why do you always get reports quoting AA/RAC spokespeople Chairman whatever,They're a bloody breakdown service not a mouthpiece for all motorists.You never hear a quote from Kwikfit.
Edmund King seems exactly the type of bloke to set out to find some of the many yottabytes of actual voyeurism videos on the internet and then fail to get past the relatively few vids of dashboard footage.
"intimidation or trying to avoid another road user"
In other words 'trying to avoid drivers' intimidatory behaviour being witnessed', and 'trying to avoid reducing their speed and driving to the conditions'.
He's quite shameless with this blatant attempt to stop vulnerable road users using action cameras to redress the current imbalance and seek justice after a collision or near miss. Without it, police have even less reason to investigate and more scope to dismiss any complaint out of hand.
Haven't we already had this story?
I posted a forum topic on it yesterday.
TL;DR? "We don't like it up us." says AA.