Sued for privacy violation? Sued for failing to provide enough security by not having cameras indoors as well? Please clarify.
It's worth noting that he's proactively asking you, not just casually, but even to the extent of researching articles, before installing. A little like requesting a written opinion of you, no? Perhaps he's had an incident that has made him this cautious.
Here would be a cynic's questions:
- Since the cameras are outside and monitoring doorways into the structure, then it's seems likely that they are pointed at the house itself? Yes/No?
- Of the cameras pointing at the house, are the FOV's as tight as they can be?
- Of the cameras that might have views into the living spaces of the dwelling, do you plan on using privacy masks where a renter would have a reasonable expectation of privacy?
- Are you planning to or have you been asked to provide any mechanical PTZ type cameras?
- Are you planning to or have you been asked to provide cameras with the ability to record audio?
If 3,4,5 are answered Yes, No, No then that should be the end of it.
If 4, PTZ, is Yes, is it by customer request or your suggestion? How necessary is it?
If 5, audio is Yes, then that could be tricky, though if correct signage is in place outside, with a renter's agreement rider/waiver, as well as a rudimentary on-site test to insure Audio FOV is not invasive, then it should be ok, though I'm a not lawyer.
Marty may have some insight here (he's not a lawyer either, but is pretty close ;)
Thanks for the input. I found a web page that me be of interest to others in this situation.
I will have the customer consult his lawyer, and design a system with a renters "expectation of privacy" in mind.