The site caught wind of the search optimization juggernuaght’s stance after Arlo, Apple, Wyze and Anker, owner of Eufy, all directly confirmed to they won’t give police access to users’ smart home camera’s footage unless they’re shown a warrant or court order.
While Google hasn’t made an offical satement addrressing these claims specifcally, they make mention of the matter in their privacy and terms page, which reads:
“If we reasonably believe that we can prevent someone from dying or from suffering serious physical harm, we may provide information to a government agency — for example, in the case of bomb threats, school shootings, kidnappings, suicide prevention, and missing persons cases. We still consider these requests in light of applicable laws and our policies.”Google
Amazon has admited giving video to police on 11 different occasions so far this year.
“I think the large majority of public would be willing to sacrifice a little privacy if you’re not doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about,” Detective Jennifer Rodriguez of the Arlington, Texas Police Department said during Wednesday’s edition of NewsNation’s “Rush Hour.”
But privacy activists say there is no process for a judge or device owner to determine whether there has been an emergency. And they fear that by giving an inch, police could take a mile.
“In each instance, Ring made a good-faith determination that there was an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to a person requiring disclosure of information without delay.”Amazon
Just like Google, Ring’s policy is in the fine print. They warn users that they’re granting Ring permission to use and distribute the content for any purpose.
Some people prefer to choose a product that grants law enforcement quick access to potentially lifesaving data during an emergency. If you don’t want them to have that information, go with Apple. Still, no matter your device, your digital footprint will always be subject to subpeona.