On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 07:08:02 GMT, Mark Evans
wrote:

In uk.legal Cynic wrote:
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:44:25 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Cerberus . wrote:
Quote from ICO - The use of cameras for limited household purposes is
exempt from the DPA. This applies where an individual uses CCTV to
protect their home from burglary, even if the camera overlooks the
street or other areas near their home.

Doesn't specifically say it's ok to have it covering a neighbour's
property, though.

It doesn't specifically say that it's OK to take pictures of bananas
either.

Anything that is not prohibited is by default permitted.

Even if something is prohibited it does not follow that it is prohibited
by a specific law.
e.g. filimg someone on someone else's (including their own) property is
far more likely to be an issue under "anti-stalking" or "Human Rights"
laws.

Er, if someone is charged with harassment it's because it's prohibited
by the Protection from Harassment Act. The Human Rights act only applies
to public bodies.