Dashcam

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dashcams with different focal lengths
Differences between wide-angle lenses

As dashcam ( portmanteau word from English dash board , instrument panel 'and camera , camera'), a video camera called the frontal recording while driving.

technology

Standalone devices

The camera is usually attached to the dashboard or the windshield. Suction cup mounts or adhesive pads are often used as fastening material.

In contrast to conventional video recording systems, a dashcam saves recordings continuously in a loop. Older recordings are overwritten after a programmable time has elapsed or when the storage medium's storage limit is reached. This feature is often referred to as loop recording . The content is stored digitally. Typically supported are SD memory cards and microSD cards up to 32 GB (SDHC) and up to 64 GB (SDXC) storage capacity for newer dash cams. Most of the video data is saved according to the H.264 standard, so that the recordings can be viewed on most commercially available computer systems.

Many cameras have an acceleration sensor (G-sensor), which provides the current video with write protection in the event of an accident. This ensures that the video is not overwritten. In the event of incorrect adjustment and a bumpy ride, however, this can lead to undesired activation of the write protection. In some car cameras, the motion sensor can be switched on and off and its sensitivity can be regulated.

Some dashcams have an integrated GPS receiver . The data determined from this, the respective position and the driven speed, can be displayed directly in the recordings or used for later evaluation, depending on the model.

There are also cameras with driver assistance systems , for example lane departure warning systems , distance warning systems (English Front Collision Warning System , FCWS for short), as well as traffic sign recognition . With the immediate display of the driven and the permissible speed on the rear display, these systems can take on functions similar to a head-up display .

Alternative systems

So-called dashcam apps are partly an alternative to dashcam. This is a software solution in the form of a mobile app for a smartphone with a camera , satellite navigation and acceleration sensor . There are numerous dashcam apps especially for the Android operating system and for the iPhone .

While dash cam devices cost 50 to 300 euros per se, many dash cam apps are free or available for a few euros. Since dashcam devices are usually permanently mounted compared to dashcam apps and are not re-installed before each journey, dashcam devices as well as dedicated navigation devices offer more ease of use. In addition, smartphone cameras are usually not designed to record a night drive. The video quality and the wide angle of newer dashcams reach a viewing angle of up to 160 degrees and is therefore superior to a smartphone. Dashcam apps are more suitable for spontaneous recordings.

Smartphone batteries are sensitive to temperature. In summer or when there is long exposure to light, the permissible operating temperature can be exceeded. This poses a risk of explosion. Fixed dash cams therefore usually contain a less temperature-sensitive capacitor.

Action camcorders that are permanently supplied with energy via the on- board network are another alternative .

Usage and history

Motorists install these cameras mainly to document traffic processes and thus to prove the question of the fault of traffic accidents or to be able to report misconduct of other road users or to document police checks. However, if the person is at fault, the dashcam recording can also have a negative impact on the owner, as the police have the right to ensure the recording, depending on the country.

Legal situation of individual countries

This section presents the situation in Germany , Austria and Switzerland . Help us describe the situation in other countries.

Germany

In May 2018, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) declared the use of dashcam recordings as evidence before German civil courts to clarify traffic accidents as permissible. "Dashcams may be used as evidence in traffic accidents," the judges decided. The recordings violated the Federal Data Protection Act , but since those involved in the accident would have to provide information about the person, insurance and driver's license anyway, this is of secondary importance. The decision therefore does not make the creation of recordings "legal", but merely enables them to be used as evidence in court.

With regard to the Federal Data Protection Act (BDSG), media comments and statements by the data protection authorities took the view that the current recording process of the camera already constitutes a violation of the Federal Data Protection Act. In 2014, for example, the Düsseldorf district authorities for data protection in the non-public area declared that the use of cameras was inadmissible because it seriously encroached on the personal rights of road users and their legitimate interests were predominant. Basically, the data protection literature is extremely critical of the vehicle cameras. Other voices in the literature therefore suggest a modified dashcam, which reduces the interference with the informational self-determination of other road users by means of data protection-friendly technology design of the camera. So far, when making dashcam recordings, the user remains at risk of being fined for violating the GDPR. In order to reduce this risk, users are therefore recommended to use data-saving devices that keep the scope of the recordings as small as possible.

In the German population itself, opinion on dash cams was inconsistent in 2015. According to a survey on behalf of the German information and telecommunications industry association Bitkom , 58 percent were of the opinion that dashcams would contribute to road safety. 67 percent would like dashcam videos to be admitted as legal evidence. On the other hand, 54 percent found that dashcams create an atmosphere of surveillance and 45 percent feared the cameras might distract the driver from traffic. 26 percent found that dashcams represent an invasion of the privacy of other road users and should be banned.

Austria

In Austria, the data protection authority takes the legal position that dashcams are subject to the reporting obligation laid down in the Data Protection Act and the registration procedure for video surveillance. In the so far only notification of a corresponding application, the Data Protection Commission refused registration in February 2012 and thus prohibited the applicant from using it. According to the authority, the operation of dashcams by private individuals is generally not permitted in Austria. The decision was not submitted to a judicial review by the applicant; overall, the data protection authority assumes that the development is “not yet completed”.

The Austrian Administrative Court confirmed the ban on the use of so-called "dashcams" in road traffic in the case Ro 2015/04/0011 with a ruling dated September 12, 2016. In doing so, he basically affirmed the legal authorization of private individuals to video surveillance (also) in public places, provided that the client has a legal relationship under private law with the monitored property or person. The VwGH saw this requirement fulfilled in the case to be assessed by it. Regardless of the existence of legal authority, the VwGH considered video surveillance using a dashcam to be disproportionate and ultimately not permissible. However, the extent to which the evidence obtained by means of dashcam video surveillance may be used has not yet been clarified.

Switzerland

According to Digitec , the demand for dash cams in the summer of 2013 was still “low, but growing rapidly”.

The Federal Roads Office sees Dashcams no violation of the road traffic law, as long as "the camera field of view of the handlebar does not restrict and not by operating the camera while driving." In contrast, we see the Office of the Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner a breach of the Data Protection Act , because with dashcam recordings people can inevitably be recognized and they are not informed in advance within the framework of the required transparency. For this reason, the office published an explanation in July 2013 recommending that dashcams be avoided. The federal court ruled in October 2019 that dashcam recordings are not permitted as evidence of a traffic offense because the recordings are made in secret, and left open whether recordings may be used in serious criminal offenses.

For the insurance company AXA Winterthur , accident data memories are a better alternative, since dashcams would only provide a “limited field of vision”.

Russian Federation

Dashcam image of the Chelyabinsk meteor

The use of dashcams is very widespread in Russia. The resulting bizarre or drastic recordings became an internet phenomenon . In particular, dashcam recordings from the Chelyabinsk meteor in 2013 contributed to the popularity of the devices in Western European countries.

The reasons for the high prevalence include frequent escapes, corrupt traffic police and faked or provoked accidents by extortion gangs. Dashcam recordings have been accepted as evidence in Russian courts and are made attractive by lower liability insurance premiums.

Great Britain

The use of dashcams is permitted by law. In the UK, individual car insurance companies offer discounts if the policyholder installs a dashcam.

literature

  • Michael Atzert, Lorenz Franck: Admissibility and usability of video recordings by dashcams . In: RDV , 2014, 136–140
  • Thomas Balzer, Michael Nugel: Mini Cameras in Road Traffic - Limits under data protection law and usability of video recordings in civil litigation . In: NJW , 2014, 1622–1627
  • Peter Schlanstein: Evaluation of vehicle data memories . In: Verkehrsdienst , 2014, 15–25

Web links

Commons : Dashcams  - collection of images, videos and audio files

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Use of car cameras. WDR , October 7, 2013, archived from the original on October 9, 2013 ; accessed on January 6, 2014 .
  2. ↑ Welt.de : Dashcam collects evidence against traffic hooligans
  3. ↑ a b c 20 minutes : "Car cameras violate data protection" (edition of July 3, 2013)
  4. ↑ BGH of May 15, 2018 - VI ZR 233/17 = BGHZ 218, 348 = NJW 2018, 2883 = MDR 2018, 990 [1] (full text online); s. a. BGH: Dashcam videos admissible as evidence. In: Zeit Online. May 15, 2018, accessed May 15, 2018 .
  5. ↑ Video on the dashboard (PDF; 39 kB) in: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung , March 12, 2013
  6. ↑ Inadmissibility of video surveillance from vehicles (so-called dash cams) - decision of the supervisory authorities for data protection in the non-public area. (PDF) In: BFDI . Düsseldorfer Kreis, February 26, 2014, accessed on October 23, 2018 .
  7. ↑ Matthias Lachenmann, Sebastian Schwiering: Operation of video cameras in cars. (In) admissibility under data protection law to operate on-board cameras in cars . New Journal for Traffic Law (NZV), 2014, p. 291-298 .
  8. ↑ Ferdinand Wessels: Dashcams in the light of data protection - preservation of evidence vs. Informational self-determination. In: JurPC Web-Doc. 186/2015, paras. 1-76. Retrieved December 19, 2015 .
  9. ↑ LfDI Baden-Württemberg: BGH judgment Dashcams - data protection through technology design. February 4, 2019, accessed June 8, 2020 .
  10. ↑ Dashcams: 6 out of 10 Germans expect more traffic safety from car cameras . Bitkom press release from June 1, 2015, accessed on June 12, 2015.
  11. ↑ Survey on video cameras in cars - Germans expect more road safety. Focus Online, June 1, 2015, accessed on June 16, 2015.
  12. ↑ Decision K600.319-005 / 0002-DVR / 2012 on the decision of November 7, 2012
  13. ↑ Data Protection Authority: Video cameras in cars ( Memento from July 14, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
  14. ↑ VwGH September 12, 2016, Ro 2015/04/0011 (PDF)
  15. ↑ Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner : Explanations on video surveillance in vehicles ( Memento from August 15, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) (July 2013)
  16. ↑ Judgment 6B_1188 / 2018 of September 26, 2019.
  17. ↑ Swiss radio and television : Dashcam: the camera on the dashboard
  18. ↑ Damon Lavrinc: Why Almost Everyone in Russia Has a Dash Cam . In: Wired . February 15, 2013. Retrieved February 4, 2016.
  19. ↑ Tom Balmforth: Cops, Cars, And Videotape: Russians Embrace Dash-Cam Craze . In: RadioFreeEurope / RadioLiberty , November 24, 2012. Retrieved February 4, 2016. 
  20. ↑ Why Dash Cams Are So Popular in Russia? . In: Understand Russia . March 14, 2014. Retrieved February 4, 2016.
  21. ↑ Stalzamt: Dashcams allowed? . In: engine block . March 2, 2015. Retrieved February 4, 2016.
  22. ↑ Callum Tennent: Dash cams and the law: what you need to know. Which? , accessed October 23, 2018 .
  23. ↑ swiftcover.com Example: Swiftcover 12.5% ​​dashcam discount, accessed May 2018