Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

“Surveillance mode” in the UK

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I’m losing track… Do we have sentry/surveillance mode in the U.K. yet? Where we can remotely bite the camera in real-time through the app?

I’m on some variant of 21.36 and can’t seem to see it.

Wondering if that’s another US only feature for whatever reason…
 
seems to be US only but maybe its still in testing? There are a few different branches right now.

Its possible that Tesla are testing bandwidth/data usage as it'll use the cellular network - maybe won't want to roll it out widely until they have measured that. Although realistically most people won't use it - but would have been good when I had a phantom alert from sentry the other day. Heck if they send a sentry alert they should automatically email you a clip too
 
I wonder how many other U.S. only features will get released. Considering I’m paying £9.99 a month now for premium connectivity, I was kind of hoping we would get these kinds of internetty features at the same time. But, maybe something like GDPR simply makes it too hard.
 
I wonder how many other U.S. only features will get released. Considering I’m paying £9.99 a month now for premium connectivity, I was kind of hoping we would get these kinds of internetty features at the same time. But, maybe something like GDPR simply makes it too hard.
GDPR would apply to you as an operator, not to the sale of equipment. I can buy all sorts of cameras, microphones and lenses without issue, it's how I choose to use them that is regulated. There's no liability to Tesla to provide the feature that I can see.
 
GDPR would apply to you as an operator, not to the sale of equipment. I can buy all sorts of cameras, microphones and lenses without issue, it's how I choose to use them that is regulated. There's no liability to Tesla to provide the feature that I can see.
would the ability to view it remotely make a difference?
We can already record? so if there is a theoretical GDPR or other privacy issue then does this new feature make it worse or is the current feature already the elephant in the room?
 
would the ability to view it remotely make a difference?
We can already record? so if there is a theoretical GDPR or other privacy issue then does this new feature make it worse or is the current feature already the elephant in the room?
I can't see how viewing would have any bearing on GDPR, as that's really about storing personally identifiable information. Viewing isn't storing. In that recent case around Ring cameras the chap was found liable for storing her personal data under the DPA and GDPR. I guess if it creates a recording of what you view, and you triggered it so would need to have a justification for doing so. Also people should know if they are being recorded, it's clearly not been tested but the assumption would be that the headlight flash and message on the screen achieve this.
Maybe this would be more about Article 8 of the UK Human Rights Act, but that seems pretty unlikely to me.
 
would the ability to view it remotely make a difference?
We can already record? so if there is a theoretical GDPR or other privacy issue then does this new feature make it worse or is the current feature already the elephant in the room?
The current sentry mode is no different from dash cameras that are readily available that can be enabled to record whist parked. Remote viewing capability may complicate the legal analysis. I will be disappointed if GDPR results in this being unavailable to UK vehicles.
 
GDPR applies to organisations, not individuals. 🤷‍♂️
That is not correct

1637780585596.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrBadger
I can't see how viewing would have any bearing on GDPR, as that's really about storing personally identifiable information. Viewing isn't storing. In that recent case around Ring cameras the chap was found liable for storing her personal data under the DPA and GDPR.

I think the main reason he got prosecuted was that he deliberately put up cameras covering other people's property and public places then didn't move them after being asked repeatedly.

Technically anyone with cameras that record and can see outside of their property (e.g. the street in front of your house) *could* be prosecuted *if* they fail to comply with GDPR requests, but in reality I doubt much of that will go on if you're not taking the Michael.

The ombudsman says that images are personally identifiable information, but if some random person asked you to provide any images you have of them and you don't know who they are, how would you do that?

Where it gets really tricky is vehicles, though. To be properly compliant then you should have notices in place including the name and address of the data controller - pretty impractical. I think this is an unintended consequence of the legislation.