Hacker News Reader

Comment by tantalor | Hacker News Reader

> they're filming their own property

What? No. Guests have reasonable expectation of privacy, same as hotels.

AirBnB is explicitly hiding in a gray area. The same hotel protections do not necessarily extend to having a friend over at your house (which is closer to the legal interpretation AirBnB prefers) You are legally permitted to put up cameras in your own house, and it's a common practice to set up "nanny cams" when leaving the house to a babysitter

So basically more or less allowed, but you're being a dick for doing it.

There might be laws against it actually, since the other person does not explicitly consent to being filmed, and it's not a public space.

I'm pretty sure secretly filming your guest's bedroom is also covered by existing laws, even without the rental.

There is also possibility the existing laws take into account intent. Filming with a nanny cam that is visible (even if you don't call it out) to protect your kid is allowed. Filming with a hidden cam for prurient reasons is illegal. Proving intent would be case by case and up to a prosecutor/court.

Airbnb is not explicitly hiding in a gray area. Airbnb TOS forbids the use of undisclosed cameras and those in private areas.

It’s like at a hotel that prohibits smoking but people smoke in the rooms anyway. The hotel doesn’t “hide in a gray area,” they have a rule and it isn’t always followed.

But you can’t put your nanny cams in the rest room.

> What? No. Guests have reasonable expectation of privacy, same as hotels.

What set of laws guarantee that? This is a consequence of living outside the laws meant for hotels. AirBnBs are not hotel rooms.

Lots of jurisdictions have privacy laws.

For a home, they are based on whether there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. People have a reasonable expectation of privacy in pretty much any bedroom intended for their use.

I would love to see some references to privacy laws that fit the situation. I think most of them come in the form of apartment landlord -> occupant, not occupant -> occupant. I think people really need to look carefully at what these laws actually say because I doubt any of the hotel laws and most of the renter laws actually apply.

It's not a stretch that the bedroom and bathroom of a rental would fall under this law, for example:

http://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-21-15.html

The definition isn't about the rental arrangement, just the use of the room.

I don't know if I would rely on this one. Its about changing rooms (with a very specific definition) and bath rooms. A camera in the living room would probably not trigger the law. You might be there with the bedroom, but I wonder if that law would be triggered by a private security system for the home owner.

I'm pretty sure privacy laws would apply to a simply invited guest; "you can change in there". I wouldn't be surprised if they applied to illicit recordings of a spouse...

People enjoy strong rights in their own homes, they don't trump every right someone else may have.

but it's not an "occupant->occupant" relationship when one occupant is paying the other (aka "the owner"), with whom they have had no meaningful prior relationship, for the privilege of staying in this place for a day or two. That is by definition a stranger, and a landlord.

It would be, but AirBnB's legality and where it fits in are constantly under dispute. If the jurisdiction has short term rental laws that fit, then yes its landlord -> occupant, but many places that rent AirBnB are not legally allowed in the first place. The law is different than common sense.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com