Jump to content

Amendment to CCTV Rules


Recommended Posts

On 11/4/2020 at 3:52 AM, effion said:

My stand on it is same as Invictus.

If the player has a recording and CCTV does exist then it should be allowed to use with no need for consent.

The consent rule should be removed, there are players who will never give their consent. What we should have is a rule that, if CCTV is there, there is no need for consent, no matter if the other party has a recording or not. A simple screenshot is enough. Both should already know that when the CCTV is there, having screenshots or not doesn't change the fact camera RPly recorded something.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
On 11/15/2020 at 3:33 PM, Queen said:

Do you...care to elaborate?

Well someone may have to correct me but all you had to do AFAIK is file your CCTV with the city, accompanied with installment roleplay (or registration of existing/mapped cameras) when applying for a business license and that’s it. You get to roleplay your cameras. If I remember correctly the form had to include a POV screenshot of what the camera would see. If there’s a dispute about what happened on camera it’s an administrative matter, but can usually be settled among players. If it’s private property the rule tended to be if you have cameras mapped you have cameras. A lot of it was reasonable common sense based too. 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, eTaylor said:

Well someone may have to correct me but all you had to do AFAIK is file your CCTV with the city, accompanied with installment roleplay (or registration of existing/mapped cameras) when applying for a business license and that’s it. You get to roleplay your cameras. If I remember correctly the form had to include a POV screenshot of what the camera would see. If there’s a dispute about what happened on camera it’s an administrative matter, but can usually be settled among players. If it’s private property the rule tended to be if you have cameras mapped you have cameras. A lot of it was reasonable common sense based too. 

The thing is, you don't need mapping to have CCTV on GTA World, a security agency can set it up, but it's basically it. If the CCTV is there, it's there, and having screenshots or not doesn't change the fact that CCTV would RPly record the things that happened. Going around that/denying the camera would be PG, if the CCTV is installed there. No need to have a consent of both players at all IMO.

Link to comment

I think the rule should be that cctv stands, but that the party using it needs to be highly consistent in how they apply it.  Shadow play and such very rarely captures the shot from an angle the cctv would so the injured party should factor that in always.  Also i think the camera should be visible (it can be discreet) 

 

For dashcams I think  either the user needs to point out the camera or if it is " hidden" they need to only use an appropriate head on angle and no text  (do dashcams do sound? ) 

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Late said:

The police cars have visible dashcams on their windows. Is there not a way @Oggy or one of the best modding team cant make it an "extra" to add to all cars at the mechanic shop.

If you have that object you can RP a camera, if you don't then you can not?

I'm pretty sure that'd require a modification of every single vehicle in the game. There'd then be the custom files to download for the vehicle. I don't think this is feasible.

Link to comment
8 hours ago, .Pluto. said:

The thing is, you don't need mapping to have CCTV on GTA World, a security agency can set it up, but it's basically it. If the CCTV is there, it's there, and having screenshots or not doesn't change the fact that CCTV would RPly record the things that happened. Going around that/denying the camera would be PG, if the CCTV is installed there. No need to have a consent of both players at all IMO.

I’d invite you to read it again. It’s not a consent system, it’s a registration so you can’t just ass pull working cameras. So that when you say “Yes, I have a camera” it’s been verified and registered as such. With proof of both it’s POV so that there can be no disagreement on whether or not something was on camera. And if there’s no footage, the only dispute there can be is in the narrative of events (something which you can almost always resolve between players). The common sense aspect is that if there is a camera there is a camera, and if not there’s tangible evidence of said camera whether it’s visible or not. It’s more towards people pointing at an empty corner saying “the camera is there!” whenever it’s convenient, and conflict resolution.

Link to comment

I support a change too. I'm not sure if anyone's mentioned this, i'm primarily just going off of a discord conversation about this but in a lot of places IRL you don't need consent to record as long as there's no audio. If there's audio on the other hand, the person recording needs clear written consent. This is how private investigators get their videos for work, how crowds are recorded without getting a waiver from each person, and (i'm sure its been mentioned but) how CCTV cameras can capture evidence of crimes without the criminals consent.

Again, sorry if this has been stated I didn't read the whole thread, that's just my two cents

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