Hello,

I'm considering designing my own body camera and microphone to attach to prescription eyeglasses. The goal is record my interactions while I'm in public in the event that I witness or am involved in an altercation.

Ideally the setup will record HD video, have long battery life and be able to upload or stream directly to a web server I operate via Bluetooth or WiFi provided by my cell phone. I don't mind lugging around extra batteries or looking like a cyborg. I actually prefer the cyborg look as a deterrent so people are aware they are being recorded.

Unless someone can suggest a high quality preassembled body camera for a reasonable price, I think it would be a fun project to make my own. I have the engineering knowledge to design the circuit board, BMS, microcontroller and necessary encoding but I don't know much about what is available for modern audio and video that will effective in a legal context (I'm going for something akin to body cameras worn by police).

Aside from the recording hardware, I'm also exploring microcontroller options to integrate with artificial intelligence as well as real time streaming. If streaming is not possible, I would like to upload a photo of what I'm seeing about once per second as well as the audio. I'm ultimately planning for the event where an adversary will attempt to remove or destroy the camera so local data storage only is not sufficient.

All suggestions are welcome. Please let me know hardware options as well as practical limitations for use in the field. Thank you.

 

Your profile does not say where you are. But if you are in the US, this would be illegal in many states. Strangely, video recording is legal, but not audio recording without the consent of all parties.

 

Your profile does not say where you are. But if you are in the US, this would be illegal in many states. Strangely, video recording is legal, but not audio recording without the consent of all parties.

It’s true that some states require “two-party” consent, or sometimes do, but the majority of states are one-party consent so as long as you only record what you can hear with your own ears in one of those, you are OK, As far as video is concerned, some of the “mixed consent” states are the ones who permit video without audio—and unattended cameras (e.g.: doorbell cameras) might not be allowed to record audio. (see map below)

[source]​

One additional twist is facial recognition—some states prohibit the use of FR. Of course you are going to include a heads up display so you can use FR and things like night vision—right?

 

It’s true that some states require “two-party” consent, or sometimes do, but the majority of states are one-party consent

Note that if he records a conversation between two strangers standing near him, no party to the conversation is consenting, so that is likely illegal in a one party state.

 

Your profile does not say where you are. But if you are in the US, this would be illegal in many states. Strangely, video recording is legal, but not audio recording without the consent of all parties.

I'm in Canada which is one party consent. My research revealed:

Section 184, Criminal Code of Canada

Private Property:
- Part of Conversation: Legal to record audio and video.
- Not Part of Conversation: Not legal to record audio or video.

Public Property:
- Part of Conversation: Legal to record audio and video.
- Not Part of Conversation (Audio): Not legal to record audio.
- Not Part of Conversation (Video): Legal to record video (no reasonable expectation of privacy).

It's not clear what constitutes being "part of conversation". Apparently this can be as simple as saying one word to become involved. I'll have to reach out to the RCMP or a lawyer to get a definitive answer.

Assuming I'm within my rights, I will add a function to enable audio/video, video only or none. I will also add an indicator light(s) to clearly signal my intention. The point of this is project is legal protection which also means respecting the privacy of private citizens and property. I have no intention of circumventing laws but I do intend to fully exercise my own civil liberties.

 

Note that if he records a conversation between two strangers standing near him, no party to the conversation is consenting, so that is likely illegal in a one party state.

Yes, but this varies. Because there is should be* “no expectation of privacy in a public space”, if he can hear what is being said many of many if not most permit it—in public. The law treats private spaces differently.

*This is always stated as “is” but that is presumptive—I am sure many people could legitimately argue that do have an expectation of privacy. What the courts have determined is that it is unreasonable to have such an expectation.

Now if they could just apply that to the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and restore the 1934 sanity…

 

Note that if he records a conversation between two strangers standing near him, no party to the conversation is consenting, so that is likely illegal in a one party state.

That may or may not apply if you are in public. A private setting, or workplace setting may be different.

As always, stopping guessing- ask an Attorney. Usually first consultation is free, and they'll answer your question. I don't see Apple or Google getting anybody's _knowing_ consent to record them with audio and video, but they do so 24x7 with your cell-phones.

 

but they do so 24x7 with your cell-phones.

Do you have evidence for this? I am not saying they don’t do this, but have not seen evidence for it. The reality is, it is not going to matter (legally) unless an illegal recording is used against someone. And that applies to the TS as well.

Ever notice that whenever you call a customer service number they inform you that the call is / might be recorded? I assume that continuing the conversation is considered consent. In that case, they are anticipating using it in a legal context.

 

This is drifting off-topic but since I Have sniffed my iPhone’s network traffic, I know that is it not constantly sending data anywhere.

 

Yes, but this varies. Because there is should be* “no expectation of privacy in a public space”, if he can hear what is being said many of many if not most permit it—in public. The law treats private spaces differently.

*This is always stated as “is” but that is presumptive—I am sure many people could legitimately argue that do have an expectation of privacy. What the courts have determined is that it is unreasonable to have such an expectation.

Now if they could just apply that to the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and restore the 1934 sanity…

I'm not an expert but in general the laws in Canada are based on what a reasonable person would do. That has always been my deciding factor and aside from one instance with police (I was temporarily detained during an investigation), I've never had an issue brought against me.

I also pride myself on having no criminal record and have worked hard to stay on the right side of the law by not resisting the demands of authority. I think this goes a long way in demonstrating to the police or the courts that I am in fact a reasonable person. My traffic stops are always easy going and respectful and I can't say I've ever had the police go outside their mandate or act immorally. My attitude is "don't start anything, won't be anything".

As for recording audio and video, the reasonable expectation is that I'm not intercepting private communications. It's well known here that I can record video or take photos in public with the exception of following people in the bathroom excreta but again, a reasonable person would conclude that is unreasonable for obvious reasons.

Audio on the other hand is more nuanced but at the same time, audio is becoming less effective in a legal context with the rise of artificial intelligence. I expect HD video however to remain relevant for some time as it's far more difficult to doctor. Furthermore, any data capture that is not obvious in its intent will be immediately discarded for my own legal protection.

This is drifting off-topic but since I Have sniffed my iPhone’s network traffic, I know that is it not constantly sending data anywhere.

I don't mind going a bit off topic given the repercussions for not considering all the facts. Getting this project wrong could easily land me in prison if a well provisioned legal team makes it their mission to convict me.

 

Getting back to the actual question about a recording legal issues, an effective scheme will be to buy a "body camera like the police departments use. That will be rugged and reliable and probably already equipped to transmit audio and video to an external recorder system. And in the event that a conversation or event is recorded, the TS can always claim it was done because the TS expected to be assaulted in the immediate future. At that point there would be no issue.

 

REturning to post #1,
Just consider the secondary results of such a creation!!! THEN STOP!!