Here's what the Canadian government[1] says about the use of surveillance cameras and notice to the public:
> Q. Should we post signs that there are cameras in operation?
> A. Yes. Most privacy laws require the organization conducting video surveillance to post a clear and understandable notice about the use of cameras on its premises to individuals whose images might be captured by them, before these individuals enter the premises. This gives people the option of not entering the premises if they object to the surveillance. Signs should include a contact in case individuals have questions or if they want access to images related to them.
This is a stronger requirement than the "we may use your personal information to improve our services" language in the EULAs for almost any of these apps.
So, ironically, I think you just helped prove the point you were replying to. Hoovering up ALL the usage information without specific notice or consent is not ok.
> Q. Should we post signs that there are cameras in operation?
> A. Yes. Most privacy laws require the organization conducting video surveillance to post a clear and understandable notice about the use of cameras on its premises to individuals whose images might be captured by them, before these individuals enter the premises. This gives people the option of not entering the premises if they object to the surveillance. Signs should include a contact in case individuals have questions or if they want access to images related to them.
This is a stronger requirement than the "we may use your personal information to improve our services" language in the EULAs for almost any of these apps.
So, ironically, I think you just helped prove the point you were replying to. Hoovering up ALL the usage information without specific notice or consent is not ok.
[1] https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-topics/surveillance-and-mo...