Post by High Priestess on Dec 17, 2015 16:51:01 GMT
See this story:
www.theverge.com/2015/12/16/10318300/airbnb-hidden-camera-lawsuit-california
and:
www.rt.com/usa/326611-airbnb-spying-california-lawsuit/
Excerpt:
"Airbnb is facing a lawsuit over a hidden camera in a rented apartment. Filed yesterday in Northern California District Court, the case concerns an Irvine, California apartment with a wireless camera allegedly installed in the living room. The plaintiff, a woman from Germany named Yvonne Schumacher, says she was unaware of the camera, which allegedly captured both naked footage and private conversations. The case brings two charges of negligence against Airbnb itself, as well as charges of wiretapping, privacy intrusion, and infliction of emotional distress against the couple who rented the home.
Schumacher stayed in the apartment commencing December 13, 2013. According to the complaint, Schumacher has " limited English skills" so the reservation had to be done through Kevin Stockton, her companion during the trip. Schumacher was not informed of the camera, and she slept and walked through the living room of the apartment without clothing as a result, believing that she was in an entirely private space.
"MRS. SCHUMACHER IS DEEPLY HUMILIATED AND ANGRY"
"Mrs. Schumacher and Mr. Stockton discussed many highly personal matters," the complaint reads, "which included financial matters, the nature of their relationship, and, essentially, private and intimate details that a couple discusses in private."
On the third day of the trip, Schumacher noticed a light coming from behind some candles in the living room and discovered the camera. It was capable of audio recording and moved in response to various events, suggesting to Schumcher that it was being controlled remotely. Schumacher and Stockton left the apartment immediately, and filed a complaint with the company, although it does not appear to have prevented the apartment from being rented out to others.
"AIRBNB TAKES PRIVACY ISSUES EXTREMELY SERIOUSLY."
"Mrs. Schumacher is deeply humiliated and angry about the fact that the camera was and/or could have been used to spy upon her while she was completely undressed and walking around within the property," the complaint alleges. "Moreover, she has been and continues to be concerned that images of her exist in electronic form and could make their way onto the Internet or some other medium."
It's not the only time Airbnb has run into privacy problems. In January of this year, Airbnb faced similar issues over a hidden camera in the bedroom of a Montreal apartment. The discovery was initially posted on Reddit, then spread throughout the media at large. Airbnb added a camera policy in November 2014, asking hosts to fully disclose any cameras and get consent where required. Still, the changes would have come nearly a year after Schumacher and Stockton rented the apartment in Irvine.
"Though we do not comment on pending litigation we will defend it vigorously," an Airbnb representative said in a comment. "Airbnb takes privacy issues extremely seriously. All hosts must certify that they comply with all applicable laws in their locations and are of course expected to respect the privacy of their guests."
My view on this:
I think it is very risky to put any type of surveillance camera indoors in an Airbnb listing -- should not be done without very good reason, and even with good reason, guests definitely must be informed in advance about it, since they may decide not to stay at a place that has indoor surveillance cameras. Guests need to be provided all relevant information so that they can make an informed choice on where to stay. From what I understand of the law, it is also more risky to put a surveillance camera indoors in a place where the host does not also live. IF the host lives there, there is more legal basis for it. Nanny cameras placed in common areas as opposed to private areas (eg living room, kitchen, den, hallways) are legal (placing them in bedroom and bathroom, private areas, is strictly illegal) but most definitely should be disclosed in advance. As well, it is illegal in the state of California to do audio recording of anyone without their permission (law enforcement operations are exempted), but the problem is that many people dont' know this, and many of the surveillance or "nanny" cameras that one can purchase, have audio recording capability. SO even if the operator does not intend to do audio recording, just having that capability on the device leaves one open to lawsuits.
Even when there is a very good reason to have an indoor camera, such as, in a real life case I know of where the property owner's belongings were being continually stolen, and property owner wants evidence of the thefts or wants to deter future thefts, having indoor cameras leaves one too vulnerable to lawsuits over privacy invasion. THe property owner I know of, who had his own belongings being stolen by one or more of his roommates, was trying to figure out what to do about this. He consulted the local police dept and was told it was legal to put up a hidden camera in his house in a common area. He did that to try to catch the culprit, and ended up being sued on allegations of invasion of privacy and various other fictions that the tenants' attorney invented. So, even though his only motivation to install the camera, was that he himself was being victimized by one or more roommates, he ended up being victimized again (perhaps even by the thieves) when he tried to defend his property.
THus, I would recommend, just quickly getting rid of (promptly evicting) problem renters, rather than using indoor cameras to try to gather evidence to show that they are problem renters. If one has more than one roommate, this might require getting rid of all roommates in order to solve the problem -- and just start all over again. I know another property owner who has done that at times. He rents to 4 roomies, and sometimes he has a problem with them, and just boots them all out and starts over. Works well for him.
I'm hoping that the Airbnb policy on disclosing cameras, applies only to indoor cameras, since a great many hosts have outdoor security cameras to deter property crimes, and it is really not the guest's place to be telling the host that they should not have outdoor cameras to protect their property from burglars, nor do I believe hosts should have to declare outdoor cameras to guests.
The lawsuit that has been filed (by Berkeley, CA attorney Peter Liederman) is viewable here: www.unitedstatescourts.org/doc/?a=26d2bb3eae0fb138631a3dc0adef11b4d5178f08&dl=1
www.theverge.com/2015/12/16/10318300/airbnb-hidden-camera-lawsuit-california
and:
www.rt.com/usa/326611-airbnb-spying-california-lawsuit/
Excerpt:
"Airbnb is facing a lawsuit over a hidden camera in a rented apartment. Filed yesterday in Northern California District Court, the case concerns an Irvine, California apartment with a wireless camera allegedly installed in the living room. The plaintiff, a woman from Germany named Yvonne Schumacher, says she was unaware of the camera, which allegedly captured both naked footage and private conversations. The case brings two charges of negligence against Airbnb itself, as well as charges of wiretapping, privacy intrusion, and infliction of emotional distress against the couple who rented the home.
Schumacher stayed in the apartment commencing December 13, 2013. According to the complaint, Schumacher has " limited English skills" so the reservation had to be done through Kevin Stockton, her companion during the trip. Schumacher was not informed of the camera, and she slept and walked through the living room of the apartment without clothing as a result, believing that she was in an entirely private space.
"MRS. SCHUMACHER IS DEEPLY HUMILIATED AND ANGRY"
"Mrs. Schumacher and Mr. Stockton discussed many highly personal matters," the complaint reads, "which included financial matters, the nature of their relationship, and, essentially, private and intimate details that a couple discusses in private."
On the third day of the trip, Schumacher noticed a light coming from behind some candles in the living room and discovered the camera. It was capable of audio recording and moved in response to various events, suggesting to Schumcher that it was being controlled remotely. Schumacher and Stockton left the apartment immediately, and filed a complaint with the company, although it does not appear to have prevented the apartment from being rented out to others.
"AIRBNB TAKES PRIVACY ISSUES EXTREMELY SERIOUSLY."
"Mrs. Schumacher is deeply humiliated and angry about the fact that the camera was and/or could have been used to spy upon her while she was completely undressed and walking around within the property," the complaint alleges. "Moreover, she has been and continues to be concerned that images of her exist in electronic form and could make their way onto the Internet or some other medium."
It's not the only time Airbnb has run into privacy problems. In January of this year, Airbnb faced similar issues over a hidden camera in the bedroom of a Montreal apartment. The discovery was initially posted on Reddit, then spread throughout the media at large. Airbnb added a camera policy in November 2014, asking hosts to fully disclose any cameras and get consent where required. Still, the changes would have come nearly a year after Schumacher and Stockton rented the apartment in Irvine.
"Though we do not comment on pending litigation we will defend it vigorously," an Airbnb representative said in a comment. "Airbnb takes privacy issues extremely seriously. All hosts must certify that they comply with all applicable laws in their locations and are of course expected to respect the privacy of their guests."
My view on this:
I think it is very risky to put any type of surveillance camera indoors in an Airbnb listing -- should not be done without very good reason, and even with good reason, guests definitely must be informed in advance about it, since they may decide not to stay at a place that has indoor surveillance cameras. Guests need to be provided all relevant information so that they can make an informed choice on where to stay. From what I understand of the law, it is also more risky to put a surveillance camera indoors in a place where the host does not also live. IF the host lives there, there is more legal basis for it. Nanny cameras placed in common areas as opposed to private areas (eg living room, kitchen, den, hallways) are legal (placing them in bedroom and bathroom, private areas, is strictly illegal) but most definitely should be disclosed in advance. As well, it is illegal in the state of California to do audio recording of anyone without their permission (law enforcement operations are exempted), but the problem is that many people dont' know this, and many of the surveillance or "nanny" cameras that one can purchase, have audio recording capability. SO even if the operator does not intend to do audio recording, just having that capability on the device leaves one open to lawsuits.
Even when there is a very good reason to have an indoor camera, such as, in a real life case I know of where the property owner's belongings were being continually stolen, and property owner wants evidence of the thefts or wants to deter future thefts, having indoor cameras leaves one too vulnerable to lawsuits over privacy invasion. THe property owner I know of, who had his own belongings being stolen by one or more of his roommates, was trying to figure out what to do about this. He consulted the local police dept and was told it was legal to put up a hidden camera in his house in a common area. He did that to try to catch the culprit, and ended up being sued on allegations of invasion of privacy and various other fictions that the tenants' attorney invented. So, even though his only motivation to install the camera, was that he himself was being victimized by one or more roommates, he ended up being victimized again (perhaps even by the thieves) when he tried to defend his property.
THus, I would recommend, just quickly getting rid of (promptly evicting) problem renters, rather than using indoor cameras to try to gather evidence to show that they are problem renters. If one has more than one roommate, this might require getting rid of all roommates in order to solve the problem -- and just start all over again. I know another property owner who has done that at times. He rents to 4 roomies, and sometimes he has a problem with them, and just boots them all out and starts over. Works well for him.
I'm hoping that the Airbnb policy on disclosing cameras, applies only to indoor cameras, since a great many hosts have outdoor security cameras to deter property crimes, and it is really not the guest's place to be telling the host that they should not have outdoor cameras to protect their property from burglars, nor do I believe hosts should have to declare outdoor cameras to guests.
The lawsuit that has been filed (by Berkeley, CA attorney Peter Liederman) is viewable here: www.unitedstatescourts.org/doc/?a=26d2bb3eae0fb138631a3dc0adef11b4d5178f08&dl=1
