Jump to content

Amendment to CCTV Rules


Recommended Posts

On 7/18/2020 at 9:43 AM, Anselmi said:

What you proposed gives a substantial benefit to people capable of recording, because let's face it - not everybody has a high end PC that can run GTAV and record simultaneously.


And what's the issue with that? This is a slippery slope you're going down on.

Ingame recording already favors people making Reports and asking refunds.  Quite frankly I can't imagine playing GTAW without a recording because of how often something will happen that will require solid proof of something having gone wrong script wise.

 

Should we also stop script fighting because not everyone plays at 144 FPS?

The reason the rule is in place is, logically, so that people don't LIE about what is in the video to make the situation advantageous for them. With a recording, there's no lying. It's just cold hard facts.

Edited by arandomgamer
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

Any final answer / update to this @Nervous @Notbond @Bjork @Canadian ?

 

We were having this discussion again in Discord the other night and to add to the suggestion:

 

The consent rule for exterior CCTV cameras should be revisited - see below.

 

See first paragraph here talking about rights to privacy in an outside setting: https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/surveillance-cameras-where-is-it-legal-to-place-them-35154

 

Quote

Generally, cameras outside are almost always fair game. That is why many buildings, particularly in very urban areas, have a number of security cameras at every corner of the structure. That way, if anything occurs on the property – be it a break in or a slip and fall accident – there is a visual record of the event. For the most part, we do not have a right to privacy while in public places. Outside on the street is generally considered a public place, so there is no issue about invading someone's privacy here under normal circumstances.

I think security cameras and their footage should be allowed, without consent of both parties, outside any business so long as:

  • Security cameras must be put in a logical place to cover the premises of the property. They shouldn't be pointed in any other places besides what's reasonable to capture that specific property.
  • Cameras must be installed by an IC security company and properly role played with a technician, installation, etc.
  • Angles must be noted when installed and owner must be able to provide log / screen shot proof of the installation and where these cameras would be specifically pointing, should the footage need to be used in legal matters. This would help to prevent powergaming as this would be an OOC requirement to even be able to use the footage.
Edited by Cellestine
Link to comment
On 7/23/2020 at 5:40 PM, Jedbediah said:

+Support, CCTV is currently less than worthless as currently it serves only to confuse people and cause hubbub when people misuse it because of the confusion that surrounds it. I can understand needing the appropriate two-party consent for public interactions but I see absolutely no reason why a business should have to seek someones 'permission' to record them and it's completely ass backwards and defeats the point of them almost entirely.

Also, no* CCTV in the world comes in HD 4k full color so the idea of using recording software/shadowplay to act as CCTV STILL doesn't close Power/Metagaming windows.

The feature and the documentation that surrounds it is wholly insufficient and needs updating and changes.

*high capacity, it's all grainy black and white footage for storage related reasons.

Actually? some places use 720p at 30 frames with color (or sometimes even higher!), for a fact I know this from working security, reason being most of the places do not store the footage beyond 30 days, recycling their space for new recording. If serious incident occurred, then chief of security would usually download the time-frame of incident and save it on another drive for legal reasons.

 

For reference, good quality CCTV you can install at home:

Spoiler

 

 

Yes, not all business' will invest in this high end, but the low end is not all black and white, unless it's a 10+ year old system, and in most cases business' upgrade. Along with how compression is done these days on video you can have quite a bit of footage in a relatively small file size, along with not having to save video from a year back unless it was an incident you chose to manually save most of the CCTV DVR's store up to X days amount of footage depending on settings and store-age capacity.

 

Before COVID19 hit, I worked as a soft. dev' for a company that provided IT & Software solutions for a private ER facility, which had about 720~1080 CCTV that stored video of up to 30 days, anything past that, was deleted/written over.

 

But back to the rule itself. As it stands, even if you MAP the outside of your business with physical CCTV objects (which exists in-game), the offending party can just say "No" to permission of using those CCTV cameras, which in essence is a bit of a grey area and results in MG/PG affect on the scene. So far, no one denied me CCTV perms when asked especially when I clarified it is actually mapped. But lets be honest, you have it Physically mapped on your business & have visible signs "CCTV Active" (there are a few signs like that in-game!) then you should not have to ask for it.

 

Why inside the business / apartment etc you don't have to ask for it, but outside for Physically mapped items from your Platinum Donator package you need? Beats the purpose of adding those.

Edited by Vash Baldeus
Link to comment
On 10/13/2020 at 9:52 AM, Cellestine said:

Any final answer / update to this @Nervous @Notbond @Bjork @Canadian ?

 

We were having this discussion again in Discord the other night and to add to the suggestion:

 

The consent rule for exterior CCTV cameras should be revisited - see below.

 

See first paragraph here talking about rights to privacy in an outside setting: https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/surveillance-cameras-where-is-it-legal-to-place-them-35154

 

I think security cameras and their footage should be allowed, without consent of both parties, outside any business so long as:

  • Security cameras must be put in a logical place to cover the premises of the property. They shouldn't be pointed in any other places besides what's reasonable to capture that specific property.
  • Cameras must be installed by an IC security company and properly role played with a technician, installation, etc.
  • Angles must be noted when installed and owner must be able to provide log / screen shot proof of the installation and where these cameras would be specifically pointing, should the footage need to be used in legal matters. This would help to prevent powergaming as this would be an OOC requirement to even be able to use the footage.

Moreover? Physically mapped objects should be a requirement, meaning Security firms who will be doing installation should have access to all the CCTV objects without the need for Platinum Donation so they can actually map the items, where Admins will be able to remove them as well if failed to install properly or realistically.

  • Applaud 1
Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...

CCTV in buildings isn't something that requires consent to my knowledge, it is CCTV outside of buildings that do, which makes sense when people cannot provide evidence of setting up CCTV or any form of roleplay regarding the maintenance there of, positioning, and so on and so forth. CCTV outside requires OOC consent because exterior cameras are not visible, and the RP likely would change if they were visible.

 

I also don't like the idea of forcing people to go to security companies to setup cameras. Gas stations have cameras and typically aren't wired up by security contractors, and many other places don't as well. Many people may have internal CCTV they've no wish for third parties to get ahold of. The attempt to shoehorn in the interaction with security contractors and groups, to me, seems like something that'd immediately become heavily abused and that will become a point of confusion. I doubt that once security companies are given a monopoly over the installation of CCTV that they would act in a reasonable manor in terms of fees and expenses. 

Edited by Ted
Link to comment
On 10/13/2020 at 8:52 AM, Sting McGee said:

Cameras must be installed by an IC security company and properly role played with a technician, installation, etc.

Being in Gruppe 6 on one of my characters, I can tell you there is a whole branch of Technician dedicated to security system installations. Those installations are done in RP whilst simultaniously asking the owner to put down said equipment/furniture (control panel, cameras...) and screenshot of the installations are archived for this very purpose where it comes to a situation in which CCTV is being roleplayed and the installation has been done prior in roleplay.

 

In regards to @Ted, sure, you can easily set up your own little CCTV system as a private household, but the CCTV installation is not the only benefit from a security company. Plus, as a business owner, you have other things to worry about than installing security systems all on your own as an auto didactic learner. Whilst you should not be forced to reach out to a security company, I can see a lot of lost potential with people not roleplaying their own installations and instead just add a few camera objects within 5 minutes and say "Hey, we got a whole ass CCTV system here now covering every single angle of the store, the back alley and both directions on the road outfront.".

 

Coming back to the actual suggestion - yes, if you can provide footage of the incident and there is confirmed CCTV that would cover the area (refer to installations and camera set up as well as angle, daytimes, lighting...) it is straight forward. Without footage and the CCTV camera? That is a little more tricky as it can end up in borderline MG/PG from either side if there is a disagreement on an OOC level leading to a statement against statement. Though, offenses by lying in /do and other emotes, are to be reported and handled properly by the admin team.

Link to comment

I feel like I'm rehashing what everyone has said, but yeah I think there should be no consent for CCTV recordings. Of course all the proper roleplay would need to still happen to ensure no powergaming happens. I feel like CCTVs should be applied one of two ways;

 

1.) Application on forums (though this would just add on to the high amounts of applications already in place.

2.) Professional security companies such as G6 installing cameras with full roleplay. This permission being given by admins to these companies to do so. 

 

I feel the second way of doing it would be much more convenient will would streamline the process. 

Link to comment
  • Bombie locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...