7.7.2: Wildfire Camera Privacy Issues

Previously we have mentioned that there could be privacy issues associated with the use of wildfire cameras. While the purpose of the cameras is to scan the terrain for evidence of potential wildfires, the cameras are coincidentally picking up non-fire related images of people going about their daily lives in public or in and around their homes.

Accessibility Note

Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\): Current and Emerging Wildfire Detection Technologies depicts detection mechanisms such as satellites, Aircraft & drones, Cameras & air sensors. This is followed by Data analysis (Human analysts, algorithms) and a response (deploying firefighting teams).

"Privacy and data security concerns. Cameras and drones near residences may raise privacy concerns. If these technologies collect private data, those data may then need to be managed and safeguarded."[2]

For the ALERTCalifornia wildfire sensor network[4], one mitigation that has been cited is: "To address privacy concerns, UC San Diego [which manages ALERTCalifornia] blurs homes, parking lots and other nearby features that could track people in real time."[1]

Generally speaking, under US constitutional law, people have a reduced expectation of privacy when going about in public.[5] That federal constitutional floor, however, can be raised by states' constitutional privacy rights, such as in Article 1 of the California Constitution[6], and by the so-called comprehensive privacy statutes passed by over twenty US states in recent years.[7]. For example, the California Constitution opens with the declaration that, "All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy."[6] Privacy actions brought under the California Constitution generally need to show three things:

1. The existence of a legally protected privacy interest
2. There’s a reasonable expectation of privacy under the circumstances
3. There was a serious invasion of the privacy interest.[8]

Potential privacy violations are detailed in California Civil Code Section 1708.8. For example, Cal. Civ. Code Section 1708.8(a) provides that "A person is liable for physical invasion of privacy when the person knowingly enters onto the land or into the airspace above the land of another person without permission or otherwise commits a trespass in order to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of the plaintiff engaging in a private, personal, or familial activity and the invasion occurs in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable person" [3]. However, the use of such data to save people from death or grave injury or to protect their assets might well prove inoffensive to a reasonable person (a standard assessed and applied by a court). Indeed, in other contexts, state privacy law makes allowances for emergency conditions, but these are typically intended to be limited to the duration of the emergency.[9]

---