Hikvision Cameras Installed In UK School Bathroom

That noted, in this example, it is probably not the type of publicity that neither the Hikvision dealer nor Hikvision wants.

Related: Las Vegas Mass Murder Used Video Surveillance - Fair To Cite Manufacturer Used?

Also, someone made some bad jokes here: UK School Installs Cameras In Student Bathrooms

I don't think IPVM is doing its self any favours by posting this kind of thing.

Trying to use this as a bad mark against HIK is almost childish in my opinion.

I do wonder if you would have published this is it had been some other non-Chinese brand, or would you have used the headline

“AXIS Cameras Installed In UK School Bathroom”

The fact it’s a HIK Camera has no bearing on the story, the real story is should they have been fitted in the first place, not the fact they are HIK.

I joined IPVM for informed discussions and real information not silly digs at Chinese manufactures like this.

If there is a real issue then it should be published, but recently it seems the excuses for publishing negative stories is getting a little thin in some cases.

If this gets worse I will not be renewing my subscription.

I think any brand of camera in any country's bathroom is a privacy issue. The better way to solve the vandalism is cameras outside the bathroom doors and frequent patrols by staff.

I had a building engineer ask if we could put a camera in a restroom. I told him they didn't have enough money to draft the contract and compensate me for the damaged company reputation. He agreed.

John, I lead towards Chris here. The manufacturer is irrelevant. This is like saying Joe shot Bobby with a Glock hand gun or Jenny shot Suzy with a Smith & Wesson. While factual, it is not relevant.

Only factual when Hikvision is mentioned, right?

I find this article hilarious and outrageous at the same time. ANY camera, in ANY bathroom is no-go for me. Keeping the customer happy, especially a possible large school district, is priority number one. But really? Who in their right mind thinks a cam right above the urinals is a good idea? How is this even remotely legal given whats taking place directly below it? IMO, HikVision has absolutely no blame here, unless they showcased this particular install somewhere. My bet is, this is either photoshopped and someone has us all fooled (and I hope this is the case), or this was a DIY job at a school where "playing swords" has caused enough damage to floors below, this cam was absolutely necessary. 

I really like IPVM and have learned a lot here, but I really would like to see the Hikvision bashing to stop.

It is ridicules to say that it is Hikvision is to blame for an installers camera location.

John we went over this in the Las Vegas shooting thread.

Ford truck gets you 100 mpg and allows you to carry 5 tons of parts. Xyz company can do 50 service calls before refueling and restocking.

Model is Relevant

Dumbass uses Ford truck to carry explosives and blow up building.

Model irrelevant.

In your theory about cheap cost allowing bad installs, you should find the model of that camera posted at the school and post that model as well.

Perhaps before bagging the camera brand or the fact that a camera is mounted above urinals, perhaps it would valid to consider what the camera image actually is? If it is looking toward say wash basins due to the school experiencing vandalism, is that a problem? The fact that it is mounted above urinals, does not mean it is looking at them or anywhere near them.

 The fact that it is mounted above urinals, does not mean it is looking at them or anywhere near them...

True.

And obviously, if you were trying to capture the urinals, any competent Hik dealer would choose something more appropriate from their new line:

Exactly the same story from Colorado.

Who makes the camera?

Unless this installation was designed and installed by Hikvision, the brand is clearly not relevant. It helps draw attention, no doubt.

The installer and the school board have responsibility as they directly influence the location where the cameras are placed.

@John Honovic can you tell us how exactly Hikvision caused these items to be installed above a urinal and not in the hallway?

Since you are adement they are to be held responsible I am curious to see your reasoning (you state and or imply their responsibility in the comments above).

Ok so if a pedafile uses a HIK cam to record disputable acts on children then it's HIK's fault? I guess their Management should all go to jail for their involvement.

Its only the title. I didn't see that in any of the articles online where HIK cam in bathroom is specified. Parents are outraged and don't care who made it. It's who put it there and why? If it happened in my kids school I wouldn't care which camera it is. I would be pissed like the parents there and want answers.

Who cares what HIK posts for videos it's their choice. Maybe it was even shot with a ActI camera that they post. WHO CARES! Obviously I'm not the only one who is tired of seeing  the constant bashing. Grow the hell up and stop beating the dead horse.

Here we go again....is this a joke? The comments, not the story or the manufacturer.

We are professionals here. We've got the defenders, the detractors...and a few glock guys all arguing over a bunch of silly crap.

What you keyboard warriors are missing, for the most part, is the thought of cameras being installed in any BATHROOM. I dont give a damn who's camera it is, who's bathroom it is, what portion of the bathroom it shows, who is unsafe, or what gets vandalized. YOU CANNOT INSTALL CAMERAS IN A BATHROOM. Stalls have nothing to do with it. There is no place in that restroom that a 6 year old cant drop trow for some last minute adjustment and you havent violated their rights. Underage? Thats a special violation. And dont tell me that a high school bathroom doesn't occasionally get a younger visitor.

Lets see...violation of rights, possible production of nude images involving a minor, lawsuits that will potentially range into the millions, the type of damage to reputations that is irreparable. 

Lets have a conversation about professionally advising a potential client that they are out of their minds if they think that any security risk or potential vandalism outweighs the consequences of doing something this abhorrently stupid. Hire a monitor if its that important. 

John, might i suggest that you use some of the resources you posess to examine the last 5-8 years of case history on this subject to find out actual legal cases brought, their rulings, and what the dmages were....because I can assure you, there were damages awarded.

I once told a police captain who was in my chain of command that he was out of his f$*&%^ mind for even suggesting putting cameras in a locker room because of minor theft issues.

How many of you people have kids? I would be in a lawyers office within 5 minutes of finding this out about a school my kid was attending. I think that should be the outrage here. Not wether or not John is picking on Hikvision again (he is) or wether they deserve it (they do).

Ummmm...that was sarcasm. I think john has tried to defend his words...me, i dont care. I havent tried them, wont try them, dont care about them.

But once again, as a security professional, where is the outrage at cameras in a bathroom?

No t-shirt. You can print one for yourself after your kid's school district decides this is a good idea. Dumb ideas have a way of circulating. Especially when those with the expertise to point out the absurdity of this defer to those who don't.

Sure stirs up lots of debate, having run a British subsidiary maybe this is allowed, lots of laws are much different there.  As an example, there were no sexual harassment laws there 15 years ago. They certainly don't have lawsuits like we do because if you sue someone and lose you pay their attorney fees. 

I know Pelco (concealed) cameras were installed in the room where the lawyers for the Red Cross met as legal representatives for the guys who shot Anwar Sadat. Is Pelco guilty of something?

Most professionals know you cannot install cameras anywhere the public has reasonable expectation of privacy in this country, but I will bet this doesn't apply in more than half the countries of the world.

So if John became the editor of the NYT (and we know how he likes that rag), would the Times Square attack have been re-titled:

"Honda Accord kills one and injures 22"

In doing so, no blame or responsibility is apportioned to the perpetrator. Seems one reporting rule for some and one for Hikvision.

New: The Guardian: Chinese cameras blacklisted by US being used in UK school toilets