back to article Woman caught on CCTV performing drunken BJ blew right to privacy

Ofcom has rejected a claim that Channel 4 infringed the privacy of a pregnant Southampton woman by broadcasting CCTV footage of her administering drunken oral pleasure to a chap in a tower block lift. "Ms K" lodged a complaint of "unwarranted infringement of privacy" to the TV watchdog regarding the 9 June 2014 episode of CCTV …

  1. Gordon 10 Silver badge
    Paris Hilton

    Any by raising a court case

    She has just Streisanded herself further.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Any by raising a court case

      Anybody got a link to the vid? I'll probably regret it, but curiosity is once again my master......

    2. DropBear Silver badge

      Re: Any by raising a court case

      Not to defend her initial acts, but to be fair, I don't think any further damage was possible while some gain might have been (if she would have succeeded) - in a similar situation, it's not the 99.9999% of the world that I will never meet is what I would worry about finding out, but the 0.0001% that I personally know, and it seems those people already knew about the whole affair.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Any by raising a court case

        She should have done a Divine Brown.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Any by raising a court case

      Court case? According to the article she complained to Ofcom.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Any by raising a court case

      Wow 129 comments already.. I love the smell of fresh commentards in the morning (the pee smell, not so much).

  2. Gruezi
    Unhappy

    Pregnant women + very drunk

    WTF?!?!?!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

      ...welcome to Southampton.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

        Or rather welcome to Shirley Towers most likely...

      2. Zot

        Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

        Also - Welcome to Gloucestershire!

      3. ntevanza

        Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

        It's more like Portsmouth.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umm_Qasr

      4. tesmith47

        Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

        when is the next flight there????

    2. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge
      FAIL

      Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

      TV programmes can be transmitted many months after the material is filmed. And being "very drunk" is occasionally how pregnancies start.

      1. Gruezi

        Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

        "TV programmes can be transmitted many months after the material is filmed. And being "very drunk" is occasionally how pregnancies start."

        You are almost certainly right. However I could not resist the Daily Mail style outrage opportunity this gave me...

        (Plus I would be genuinely sad if you are wrong)

        1. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge

          Re: Pregnant women + very drunk @Gruezi

          The Ofcom report says

          she had been very drunk and that she had not been 'at the best point in her life'

          Perhaps becoming pregnant caused her to change her lifestyle. She certainly cared enough to complain.

          I can't be bothered to dive into the report to unearth the delay between the recording of the footage and the transmission of the programme. But if it was more than eighteen months then I would view that an issue. All of us have done silly things in the past and there's no need for them to remain in the public domain in perpetuity. For the same reason, I think it raises an issue about how long this footage can remain available.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Pregnant women + very drunk @Gruezi

            "She certainly cared enough to complain."

            Or she saw one of the many ads for ambulance-chasing lawyers on television. Maybe even in the ad breaks of said documentary.

            Did someone do something you don't like? Call Leeches4U No win, no fee*.

            * Disclaimer: we will bill someone, somewhere just not you.

    3. dogged

      Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

      Welcome to everywhere. There is literally nowhere this kind of thing doesn't happen. You just don't see it because either a) you're not paying attention b) you're lucky enough to have a different lifestyle and/or c) you don't watch Channel 4 documentaries

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

        I suspect the WTF in the original related to finding such ladylike behaviour in Southampton - she would be "meeting the parents" material compared to some of the locals...

        I particularly liked how she was worried that the programme may hurt her future employment opportunities. Does she really expect us to believe she will seek gainful employment at some point in her life?

        1. Bleu

          Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

          I was imagining it as an office party, sounded like that, but I suppose that was never stated.

          1. MrZoolook

            Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

            It was a residential block.

            I'm currently arguing with folks in the local rags forums that she should have been fined for indecency, and forced to cough up the money spent by our council to clean up after her. Apparently, that makes me the bad guy...

      2. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

        Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

        Or Channel 5 Reality Shows....

      3. Ken Moorhouse Silver badge

        Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

        d) you live in an area of the country which doesn't need lifts.

        Wonder if there's a bye-law about urinating in the common parts.

        1. HOW many?

          Re: Pregnant women + very drunk

          IIRC there is, or at least there used to be, a let out in the law which made urinating in a public place an offence along the lines 'but if you're pregnant its OK'.

          I think this goes back a very long time when there were few public toilets and the legislators, who tended to think women were a slightly different species anyway, managed to figure out that if you have a foetus sitting on your bladder its capacity might be impaired.

          That said, recent overhauls to the law might have closed to loophole on the grounds there are a lot more public toilets and the Council needs the income.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Dazed and confused ...

    ... by unexpected outbreak of common sense in a Regulator's judgement.

    Must be the eclipse.

    W

    1. Lusty

      Re: Dazed and confused ...

      "unexpected outbreak of common sense in a Regulator's judgement."

      How on earth is this common sense? CCTV cameras are not there for amusement, they are supposed to be there for protection. I was always under the impression that there were rules regarding what the footage could/couldn't be used for, and that the purpose was supposed to be protection.

      Given this usage has now been ruled legitimate, I'm forced to conclude that I am no longer in favour of the millions of CCTV cameras "protecting" us. Regardless of what she was doing, it shouldn't have been broadcast on TV for entertainment purposes.

      If she was committing a crime, then use the tape as evidence.

      If she couldn't be identified, use just enough footage to ask the public to help identify her.

      Given that they don't appear to be prosecuting her for urinating in the lift (the only actual crime described, assuming that's illegal) then the footage should be destroyed.

      When did the rules on CCTV change?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Dazed and confused ...

        > How on earth is this common sense? CCTV cameras are not there for amusement, they are supposed to be there for protection

        Exactly. This is just counter-productive.

        Besides, if she decides to take this to court I am not so certain a judge will concur with Ofcom's opinion. It seems a clear misuse of security camera footage.

        1. Lusty

          Re: Dazed and confused ...

          Having now googled it, she really ought to pursue this case under the DPA.

          Guidance is at https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1542/cctv-code-of-practice.pdf and clearly suggests this is in violation of the rules.

          For instance, the signage should tell the public that they are being monitored, and for what purpose. If the lift said "for the purpose of crime prevention" then selling footage to C4 is clearly not that. There are many, many other rules broken here though.

          1. h4rm0ny

            Re: Dazed and confused ...

            People should also put aside specifics that colour their judgement and realize that the category that Ofcom has just allowed this usage for is not "women giving blowjobs" but "things that the reality TV audiences find entertaining". Anything you do that is embarrassing or which others will laugh at or be titillated by is now fair game if caught on camera. They just have to make a token effort to obscure your identity.

            The cameras should not be there to catch people's errors so that your typical Big Brother viewer can find it funny. It's a quick bit of cash for a CCTV company and years of misery for those pilloried on television.

      2. swampdog

        Re: Dazed and confused ...

        Playing Devil's Advocate here. This is where the law for the masses & the rich differ. Someone who could afford a decent lawyer might argue..

        (I haven't seen the footage so below is based solely on ElReg article)

        a) the fact she was subsequently identified proves CH4 did not do enough to anonymize the footage.

        b) who owned the cameras? (breach of trust, data protection etc)

        c) the man tried to cover the camera in order to gain privacy (ie: reverse argument of Ofcom).

        d) a crime was allegedly committed - why did CH4 not report it to the police, await the outcome then proceed based upon the result?

        (I am by no means a fan of the mentality that pisses in lifts btw)

      3. Bleu

        Re: Dazed and confused ...

        You and many others with the same kind of thinking should have thought twice before the CCTV wave arrived from Northern Ireland.

        You can watch old documentaries and movies to assure yourself of that, if you didn't already know.

        Personally, I have no intention of tracking the video down, but it sounds hilariously bad, like an early Paul Morrissey or John Waters effort, except that nobody was acting.

        Writing that has changed my mind, I now want to see this tawdry pile of excreta, but if never able to do so, it will not break my heart.

      4. Robin Szemeti

        Re: Dazed and confused ...

        But they ARE protecting us.

        They are there to protect us from muggers ... I am sure you would be happy for images of a mugger to be shown on TV

        They are there to protect us from vandals ... if someone spray-painted the lift I am sure you would be happy for their image to be shown on TV

        They are there to protect us from people who urinate in lifts and make them unusable by the rest of the block ... I am more than happy for that image to be shown on TV.

        Please god tell me that now she has come forward and identified herself, the council is going to prosecute her for the damage and costs of cleaning it up etc etc.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Dazed and confused ...

          > But they ARE protecting us.

          In this particular case , that's utter bollocks. The footage was shown for entertainment purposes only and nothing to do with following up on something recorded.

          I nearly said 'crime prevention' but the camera prevented nothing.

          1. HOW many?

            Re: Dazed and confused ...

            It might not have prevented her -

            But I'll bet it'll make the next slag think twice .

            Err, No, hang on a minute ...........

            Actually, fk it. I can see all sorts of potential problems if the principle runs riot - but - (whilst I don't care a monkeys about her giving someone a blowjob) If some antisocial cow pisses all over the lift, plaster stills of the event including her face on local billboards and do the same with all the other low-level arseholes who fk up society. Its cheap, its efficient, and its commensurate.

            And for everyone who hasn't been in a piss-stinking lift in a highrise, experience that before you start preaching about her 'right' to privacy. This is not disproportionate.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Since when is banging in public lift an act of privacy ?

    Expect sad face article to appear in The Daily Mail shortly.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      > Since when is banging in public lift an act of privacy ?

      That's neither here nor there. The camera footage is not there to be sold (or more likely, given away) to some TV production company.

      1. Bleu

        While you are correct

        in principle, it is very hard to imagine that the CCTV watchers handed it to the TV channel without being given some money.

    2. Tapeador

      Von Hannover v Germany (number 1), as affirmed in e.g. Murray v BPL - just because an act is in public does not mean the person surrenders their legitimate expectation of privacy (in terms of the pictures being broadcast/published).

  5. petur

    Good

    Now she has identified herself they can send a bill for cleaning up the mess... + fine

    (don't know how the UK is, but here the fine for urinating in public is 60 euro)

    1. Afernie

      Re: Good

      "Now she has identified herself they can send a bill for cleaning up the mess... + fine

      (don't know how the UK is, but here the fine for urinating in public is 60 euro)"

      It does rather raise the question of why any mention of a fine is absent, doesn't it? A quick Google suggests a penalty on the order of £80.00.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Good

        > It does rather raise the question of why any mention of a fine is absent

        It does rather raise the question of what part of Ofcom "ruling" you did not understand.

        1. Afernie
          Trollface

          Re: Good

          "It does rather raise the question of what part of Ofcom "ruling" you did not understand."

          Ah, self-satisfied AC snarking. Always good value for money.

          "cannot have a legitimate expectation of privacy in circumstances where their behaviour is severely anti-social and contravenes public decency in the manner shown in the CCTV footage i.e. urinating on the floor of a communal lift and performing a sex act in a communal lift".

          That's likely to be an actionable offence, and I'd reckon any such sentence would have a significant bearing on the outcome of the Ofcom ruling (that I understood just fine, thanks) and would be relevant background. But please, continue to snipe from cover if it shores up your fragile ego.

        2. Manolo
          FAIL

          Re: Good

          "It does rather raise the question of what part of Ofcom "ruling" you did not understand."

          He isn't talking about the Ofcom ruling he's wondering why she hasn't been fined for urinating in public.

      2. JohnMurray

        Re: Good

        No offense is committed in the leaving of urine on a floor.

        An offense may be committed in the act of urination if the genitals are willingly exposed to other persons, in which case the offence of "exposure" (sexual offences act 2003 section 66) is committed (he also means she).

        Having sex with a person who is drunk may well be considered, by a court, to be rape if the person involved is incapable of consenting to sex.

        1. Afernie

          Re: Good

          Southampton Council byelaws make it a summary offence to urinate in a public place. However as the unedited footage shows them effectively both exposing themselves to the operators, public decency offences would seem to apply too.

        2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Good

          "No offense is committed in the leaving of urine on a floor."

          Littering?

    2. Shocker-z

      Re: Good

      Who said she left mess? Maybe she's a good girl ;-) also wouldn't it be the man that left the mess, if she didn't *self clean*

      Yeah there's a fine of I think £50/60 here too

      1. Sir Runcible Spoon Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: Good

        @Shocker-z

        these comments are referring to the woman being seen to urinate on the floor of the lift, not the result of some baby-gravy dribbling down her leg onto the floor.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Good

      @Petur,

      You can be charged with "outraging public decency" in the UK.

      Especially if they are an ugly couple :)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Good

        > You can be charged with "outraging public decency" in the UK.

        Well, you can be charged with being in possession of an offensive wife. I saw it on the 9 o'clock news.

        1. Anomalous Cowturd
          Stop

          Re: Good

          That was Not the nine o'clock news!

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Good

            > That was Not the nine o'clock news!

            True. It was much more informative than anything else at that hour.

    4. This post has been deleted by its author

      1. MrXavia

        Re: Good

        who cares if they were having sex? who cares if they got butt naked!

        The problem is the pissing on the floor!

        If she did it in the street over a drain, next to a tree, or on a patch of earth then who cares, its not hurting anyone...

        But in a lift! that is filthy...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Good

          You're joking right?

          You're waiting for a lift with your child and the doors open on that?

          Surely the purpose of public sex is the risk of being caught (although this appears to be so casual - and drunk - that it wasn't a consideration).

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Good

            > You're waiting for a lift with your child and the doors open on that?

            Ah, cool. The Think Of The Children angle. We were missing that.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Good

            "You're waiting for a lift with your child and the doors open on that?"

            Luckily for you, your kid doesn't have to chance it now. He can just watch it on TV, or look it up on You Tube, or some other kid will send a link to him. Thanks to the joke that enforcement of privacy laws is in the UK, and thanks to some underpaid (or plain idiotic) CCTV operator, and to a bunch of greedy, miserable, unprincipled, TV producers.

            She might have done something rude and stupid (urinating in a lift) or taken part in something that you don't approve of (having sex in a communal, rather than public, space), along with someone else who by the way seems to have escaped any form of condemnation. That does not justify taking advantage of her position and the equivalent of a tarring and feathering. That is not the mark of a civilised society. Is this how you want your children to grow up?

          3. HOW many?

            Re: Good

            .... you're waiting with your child and the lift door opens on that:

            What's that man doing mummy?

            (i) Err, he hid a stick of rock in his trousers but she's found it.

            (ii) Its a very old fashioned remedy for tonsilitis, but you mustn't try it until you're older'

            I declare the caption(?) competition to now be open:

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Good

              > What's that man doing mummy?

              He is receiving oral sex, son.

              Children are not stupid, it's just the adults who have been conditioned to feel uncomfortable about it, particularly so in Anglo-saxon countries, for some reason.

    5. Amorous Cowherder

      Re: Good

      Depends but in some places here in London, caught urinating in public can lead to a fine of up £500.

      1. Simon Harris Silver badge

        Re: Good

        So, it might be a data protection violation to show it on "CCTV: Caught on Camera", as some posters have suggested, but it might be fine to show it on Crimewatch.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Good

        @Amorous Cowherder Last time I was in London they were serving it in pubs for a fiver a pint.

    6. 080

      Re: Good

      Not in France, where if you stand still long enough someone will piss down your leg.

  6. TheProf

    sigh!

    And this is what passes for 'entertainment' on Channel 4 these days?

    1. Mike Flex

      Re: sigh!

      "And this is what passes for 'entertainment' on Channel 4 these days?"

      Regrettably so. In the Flex household this sort of stuff is referred to as a caring, sharing, freak show. Add a thin layer of social commentary and you can apparently serve up any amount of bad behaviour from the less fortunate in society. And to think we look down on Hogarth's contemporaries for going along to laugh at the inmates at Bedlam.

      Or perhaps you have an intimate medical problem you're too embarrassed to see your GP about? Why not expose your suppurating nads to the whole nation on one of C4's medical shows? The freakier the better.

      1. Sporkinum

        Re: sigh!

        Upvoted for the use of "suppurating nads". Though it should have been suppurating 'nads.

      2. Amorous Cowherder
        Facepalm

        Re: sigh!

        It's pure unadulterated "poor porn", cheap and easy to make. Get an out of work jobbing actor for £100/day, get them to voice over some PD CCTV footage and you've got yourself a TV show.

        The mentality of those who watch, "Ha ha, look at those people they're worse than us, let's laugh at them for entertainment!". Sorry but anyone who sinks low enough to watch this kind of utter shit for entertainment is, in my opinion, lower than the people being shown in these so called documentaries.

        Reminds me of the "TV shows" in THX-1138, simply boiled down to the key elements. You want sex? Just watch two people having it off. Want violence? Watch someone being beaten. Why bother wasting time with characters of plots, just show the key elements in the raw.

        I'd rather watch my cat take a dump than the shite that spews out of the TV channels these days.

        1. Bleu

          Re: sigh!

          I would rather see the cult of the cat video or photo wiped from the face of the 'net, maybe we have a little of a start with major media playing the same thing up for a few years now, surely that is depriving it of any appeal to coolness?

          The video of this sounds a little more interesting than one of your cat having a dump, and the acts likely left less of a stench. Cat shit is putrid, I know cat lovers enjoy the smell, can never understand why.

    2. Tim Jenkins

      Re: sigh!

      On Channel 5 it would be a game show.

      Working title: "Shafted!"

  7. GreggS

    She seems to have turned

    a wee problem into a very large one. O well, thar' she blows.

    1. Bleu

      Re: She seems to have turned

      Are you implying that Mrs. K was at the top end of plus-sized?

  8. Blank-Reg
    Facepalm

    What a charming couple. A real credit to society.

    Utter fuckups

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      > A real credit to society.

      The real credit so society are the audience levels of that shit that passes for entertainment on television.

  9. albaleo

    Being for the benefit of Mr Kite

    The celebrated Mrs K

    Performs her feats on Saturdays

    Behind the gate

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Being for the benefit of Mr Kite

      Nice one, made me go and put it on the stereo.

  10. Yugguy

    I feel sorry for her unborn kid

    Frankly.

    1. Oz
      WTF?

      Re: I feel sorry for her unborn kid

      Apparently "the stress of all the attention from the situation caused her to go into early labour". Nothing to do with drinking while pregnant then!

    2. Rich 11 Silver badge

      Re: I feel sorry for her unborn kid

      "Hello, little darling. Mummy wants to tell you all about her 15 minutes of fame."

      1. swampdog

        Re: I feel sorry for her unborn kid

        Mylan Moran?

    3. Obitim
      Coat

      Re: I feel sorry for her unborn kid

      I feel sorry for her unborn kid

      Frankly.

      That's an awful name for a child...

      1. Tascam Holiday
        Coat

        Re: I feel sorry for her unborn kid

        I expect he's called Otis...

        1. Intractable Potsherd Silver badge

          Re: I feel sorry for her unborn kid

          More likely "Schindler" ...

  11. Kay Burley ate my hamster

    Shouldn't the question be...

    How much did the council get for the footage?

    1. Dave 126 Silver badge

      Re: Shouldn't the question be...

      Yeah - Jeremy Beadle used to pay £250 for video clips... neatly, that is the same amount as the fine for smoking in an enclosed public place.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I've filed the cour verdict

    Under "No shit, Sherlock".

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I've filed the cour verdict

      Cour[t] verdict? From a quango?

      > Under "No shit, Sherlock"

      I suggest you overestimate your deduction skills, given that sort of comprehension ability.

  13. JDX Gold badge

    Harmed her social life and job prospects?

    You'd think it would make her more popular.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Harmed her social life and job prospects?

      Unlikely, who will hire someone who pisses in a lift?

      1. swampdog
        Joke

        Re: Harmed her social life and job prospects?

        Posh places that still have lift attendants. They're into that sort of thing!

        1. Bleu

          Re: Harmed her social life and job prospects?

          Lift attendants in posh places that still have lift attendants appreciate people pissing in the lifts?

          A level of perversion that I never imagined, and have trouble believing.

          1. swampdog

            Re: Harmed her social life and job prospects?

            You sound like the Irish, Dylan Moran even. Confused & even in Dublin.

            I was stuck in a lift. I had a 2ltr bottle. What would you do?

            1. Bleu

              Re: Harmed her social life and job prospects?

              Was the bottle full or empty? Was your bladder full or empty? Did you have a companion in whose penis you had a reason to have an interest?

              No, thought not. Cannot see the relevance of your post.

            2. Bleu

              Re: Harmed her social life and job prospects?

              Although I am pleased to hear 'sound like the Irish', thank you.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "cannot have a legitimate expectation of privacy in circumstances where their behaviour is severely anti-social [...]"

    It sounds like she was being very social!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      And much less anti-social than others who enjoy government support for their actions, but she went from hero to zero by leaving a mess. I know I wouldn't hire her, well maybe part time.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    By the way...

    VERY disappointed that no commentards has used the phrase 'taking the p155' so far, especially as its Friday!

    1. Sir Runcible Spoon Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: By the way...

      Is that like a p-45 but with an added 110 ?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: By the way...

      > VERY disappointed that no commentards has used the phrase 'taking the p155' so far

      And what the fuck is a P one fiftyfive?

      1. Caustic tWit

        Re: By the way...

        P(iss) O(ne) F(ifty) F(ifty)

        1. Caustic tWit

          Re: By the way...

          Corrected:

          P(iss) O(ne) F(ifty) F(ive)

          Sorry 'bout that.

  16. Bob Vistakin
    Facepalm

    If the piss touched a live wire and they got fried

    Your taxes would be similarly lavishing up their lifestyles handsomely. And their lawyers.

    1. bdam
      Devil

      Re: If the piss touched a live wire and they got fried

      On the other hand, that's a video I'm sure would be popular indeed!

  17. Nash

    Privacy...

    ..it sucks

  18. Roger Mew

    Surely for us to comment we must be given the chance to view the supposed situation?

    Without all the "facts" one must deem that the incident does not warrant being removed!

    1. Sir Runcible Spoon Silver badge

      AC/Roger Mew - busted :)

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      > Surely for us to comment we must be given the chance to view the supposed situation?

      Sure. Just get someone to film you while you blow someone in a lift, then take a leak. Then post it, we'll comment, and you'll get to "view" the situation from the receiving end.

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    biased

    Surely for us to comment we must be given the chance to view the supposed situation?

    Without all the "facts" one must deem that the incident does not warrant being removed!

    1. Sir Runcible Spoon Silver badge

      Re: biased

      AC/Roger Mew - busted :)

  20. Hellcat

    biased

    Surely for us to comment we must be given the chance to view the supposed situation?

    Without all the "facts" one must deem that the incident does not warrant being removed!

    I'm Roger Mew, and so is my wife.

  21. 2+2=5 Silver badge

    Criminal acts...

    When a Council, or private organisation, erects CCTV in a public place, they are obliged to inform people that CCTV is present, and why it is being used. Normally this results in a sign saying "CCTV is used in this area for the purposes of crime prevention and public safety". I very much doubt that they added "...and for the puerile entertainment of Channel 4 viewers".

    The only legitimate uses for the video recorded of this woman are to support her prosecution for public order offences, and/or as evidence to recover costs for cleaning/repairing the lift etc. So although complaining to Ofcom did not help, she can still take legal action against the CCTV operators.

    Next week on Channel 4: "Soap stars who once scratched their arse in public twenty years before they were famous"

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Criminal acts...

      Why did the comment by =5 got downvoted, without anyone having the courtesy of explaining their disagreement?

      Do you agree with the misuse of security appliances? Do you take pleasure in other people's misery? Do you like laughing at those who are even less fortunate than you? Please explain.

      1. JC_

        Re: Criminal acts...

        Why did the comment by =5 got downvoted, without anyone having the courtesy of explaining their disagreement?

        'Cause it's impossible to explain and so very easy to press the downvote link?

        Presumably all the down-voters think that eternal, public humiliation is a proportionate response to the situation, rather than simply paying a fine for punishment and compensation for the actual damage done.

      2. swampdog

        Re: Criminal acts...

        >Do you agree with the misuse of security appliances?

        Apparently so. When I was a sprog & RAF Phantom hit the deck.

        >Do you take pleasure in other people's misery?

        Methinks they ejected.

        >Do you like laughing at those who are even less fortunate than you?

        I was riding my motorbike when the phantom engine went overhead.

        >Please explain.

        I was leaving Billinghhay, "when the plane bounced off of the ground to my left", fell into bits over the road then landed in the field to my right.

        I noticed a big nasty bit of metal.

    2. Dan Paul

      Re: Criminal acts...

      No, she can't because she commited a crime by peeing on the floor in a public area (disorderly conduct and/or lewd and lascivious behavior) and providing oral sex (public nudity/lewd and lascivious behavior) and she continued to commit the crime knowing full well she did it in plain sight of the cameras as they tried to block them (Willful Intent). Both are guilty of the second and third crimes.

      The cameras were placed legally as they are not in any place where one would ever expect privacy like a lavatory or locker room. An elevator in a public building is a public place.

      Otherwise, a certain US football player would have been able to squash the video of him knocking out his fiancee at a Casino.

      1. JC_

        Re: Criminal acts...

        "disorderly conduct" is on the books in the US, not the UK, the same as "lewd and lascivious behavior". Besides which, Channel 4 isn't a court of law and she wasn't on trial.

        Otherwise, a certain US football player would have been able to squash the video of him knocking out his fiancee at a Casino.

        That went to court, right? Not just to television? This was broadcast for titillation and it just isn't on. There's no defence.

        I've seen girls pissing in the street during Hogmanay and felt a bit self-righteous about it, but to put it in the public domain would never cross my mind. People make mistakes and any punishment has to be proportionate to the harm done.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Oh well

    Sucks to be her.

  23. Greg J Preece

    OK, this woman's an idiot, but that description of their programme....

    "examined the use of CCTV cameras to monitor the public areas of 19 council-owned tower blocks in Southampton and included the views and opinions of CCTV operators and residents on the impact of CCTV".

    Bullllllllllllshit. Let me correct that for you:

    "offered voyeuristic middle class punters the chance to ogle the zoo of poor people doing things they would never ever do not even once, and pontificate about what it all means over their Marks and Spencer TV dinners."

  24. theOtherJT

    5 years without a TV and still not missing it...

    If this is indicative of the sort of thing that's on these days, it isn't making me feel any more inclined to get a new TV licence. (or a TV to go with it) I used to like Channel 4. What the hell happened?

    1. a cynic writes...

      Re: 5 years without a TV and still not missing it...

      With more competition for advertising budgets are lower.

      When you're putting together an exploitative hard-hitting documentary about proles ordinary working people, CCTV is cheaper than a film crew.

  25. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Information not instruction

    Going Down

  26. Bleu

    This is a very good example

    of the role of television to educate and inform.

    Not that I'll be tracking the video down. Personally, I think that discretely pissing in public places away from where people live or work when there is no public loo nearby should, other than in high summer, not be treated, legally or socially, as an offense.

    It doesn't harm anyone, the temperature quells the stench, and it is easy to be caught short in the depths of winter.

    In summer, people deserve a little social shaming if they don't find a place away from where others live or work, or worse, when there is a public toilet in easy reach.

    In the elevator of a building, really, WTF was Mrs. K thinking!

    I wonder what Mr. K thinks of it all, presumably he was not the target of her oral attention.

    1. Fink-Nottle

      Re: This is a very good example

      > I think that discretely pissing in public places ... It doesn't harm anyone, the temperature quells the stench, and it is easy to be caught short in the depths of winter.

      You've obviously never had to push a wheelchair down a street where someone - or their dog - has pee'd across the street.

      1. Bleu

        Re: This is a very good example

        You may explain the degree of suffering. I do not support people or dogs 'pissing across the street', but dog owners allow it, here most pick up dog shit (thankfully), but most allow their territorial markings.

        If I am caught short in cold wind, I generally know where the nearest shop with a toilet or public toilet is.

        If not, plants or a drain, which nobody can see.

        I guess you are talking about summer, *sincere* congratulations for helping a wheelchair-bound person, but can't see the point of your post.

        1. Fink-Nottle

          Re: This is a very good example

          > If I am caught short in cold wind, ... plants or a drain, which nobody can see. ... can't see the point of your post.

          As you correctly point out, public urination is treated, legally or socially, as an offense. You argue that these rules should be relaxed, that it is socially acceptable to urinate in a 'discrete' place.

          The problem is, you and I may differ on what we consider to be 'discrete' - hence the need for legislation.

          There is also the issue of whether 'discreet' peeing is "cumulatively tolerable".

          TV coverage of footballers spitting on the pitch made spitting more socially acceptable. While one sportsman clearing his throat may not present a major health risk, this has led to a rise in people spitting in public, and a corresponding increase in public health issues.

          1. Bleu

            Re: This is a very good example

            F-N

            I didn't correctly point out what you say I did, it is not an offense here, if done discreetly, and away from places where it causes real offense, I don't think it should be an offense at all, except if done in a specifically offensive way.

            I live above a small car-park, too many people relieve themselves there in high summer, I do not like it, but I don't think they should be arrested or fined, usually quiet, also, for women, the vehicles provide a little shelter.

            BTW, sincere thx for pulling me up on the auto-input slip.

            I often tell people when there is a toilet nearby 'excuse me, there is a public toilet/shop with a toilet you can use just a few metres away', including at the afore-mentioned carpark if I happen to be arriving home or departing at the same time, although there, it is understandable if people who are not from the area don't know where they are or are lost, it's a bit like a labyrinth. Would never dream of doing more than embarrassing them.

            As for FA players, I don't like the mentality of soccer in general, so I just about never watch it.

            While not agreeing on all things, I would truly like to hear in more detail what you meant about problems with guiding a wheelchair-bound person about in the first comment.

            People who piss in the car-park that I live above, they make it a little stinky in summer, but I clearly see that they don't make a problem for the people in wheelchairs who live in and travel about in the area.

          2. Bleu

            Actually

            when I think about the type of smell and the *relatively* few humans (not rare, not anywhere near daily) I hear or see releasing their bladders there, pretty sure the worst of the stench must be from cats.

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    > In the elevator of a building, really, WTF was Mrs. K thinking!

    Yeah, that's some lack of judgement and consideration, but as you hint, it does not justify in any way public broadcast of a private security video.

    And btw, what is it with El Reg making it looks like they're talking of some kind of court verdict? Does Mr. Haines know what Ofcom is?

    1. Bleu

      Why are you posting as AC?

      I don't agree with all you say, but some of it is valid.

      I must admit, this article and thread have really got me laughing, even though it is disgusting behaviour all around, pissing in a lift on camera (and knowing that), someone at the security company or council selling the video to a major TV channel, the TV channel broadcasting it, the regulator (IMHO) making the right choice against the complainant, although those who sold the footage should also be shown the door by their employers, that wasn't the complaint Ofcom was considering.

      Biggest laugh I've enjoyed on the 'net so far this year, will have to watch the video if I can track it down.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Why are you posting as AC?

        Not sure who you are addressing (obviously), but I for one always post as AC. Why shouldn't I?

        1. Bleu

          Re: Why are you posting as AC?

          Indeed, why not?

          I just assumed that people only use AC when the post may endanger them in some way.

          Clearly incorrect.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Why are you posting as AC?

            > I just assumed that people only use AC when the post may endanger them in some way.

            One reason I post AC, in fact, is to raise the "noise level" of AC posts to help out those who may need to use the feature out of a genuine privacy concern. The other reasons are more philosophical than practical in nature.

  28. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    If Gold rust then what of iron.

    Unfortunately, it is a shame that there is no moral code that broadcast television is held accountable to. As I have only been on this planet for 50 years... it seems that TV's demise and degradation parallels societies on many levels. It seems to lead to a twisted sociopathy and lack of empathy that tears our world apart even further. We look down on others to make ourselves feel better instead of trying to improve ourselves. One could read about this, but to show it on TV just lacks moral character. It is akin to reading raunchy Hustler Humor cartoons. We know this kind of thing exists, but they do not have to show it on TV. One could read about it instead.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: If Gold rust then what of iron.

      " [...] it seems that TV's demise and degradation parallels societies on many levels."

      It is a human character trait. The Romans had it down to a fine art with their circuses to keep the plebs happy. Public floggings and executions were popular social occasions for all classes for many centuries in Europe. The Victorians liked their "penny dreadfuls" and tours of Bedlam or foundling homes.

      Find an "outsider" group in any society - and it is too easy to render them fair game for anyone with a grievance about their own lives.

    2. Bleu

      Re: If Gold rust then what of iron.

      I've only read about it, but it gave me a much deserved laugh.

      Seeing the video or video of the dirty people selling it to to the TV station would, I imagine, quell the hilarity.

    3. Dan Paul

      Re: If Gold rust then what of iron.

      Its a shame and sociopathic when morons and numptys (of ANY social class) think it is okay to spread their virus ridden bodily fluids all over the inside of a public conveyance and made even more so when ANYONE would ever defend that kind of behavior.

      I believe that they should take the pixellation off these videos so they completely shame the idiots who did the disgusting deeds in public. If you get caught doing something bad by the camera, be prepared to be on TV. Screw "empathy" as there can be no excuse for that behavior, ever.

      Stop apologising for these fools. They lost all right to any "pity" long ago.

  29. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Britian.... great...

  30. perlcat

    Wow.

    Truly disgusting. Sadly, in the US, we can't claim any moral distinction, given that we have the Kardashians on TV, whose only difference between this utter scum and themselves is that they have enough animal cunning to parley what should be utter humiliation into a fortune. Yeccch.

    1. Bleu

      Re: Wow.

      Be careful there. You may inspire Mrs. K to a major media career, after all, Kim Kardashian was only copying Paris Hilton by releasing video of herself having sex, and pretending that it was leaked.

      Never watched any of that, but I really do want to watch the Mrs. K and not-Mr.-K in the lift video, it sounds so wonderfully tawdry, pissing on the floor of the elevator is a great touch.

      I would not want to see that elevator at the time or have to ride it a short time later, but the whole is really making me laugh.

  31. Craigness

    Rape!

    Ched Evans had his life ruined because he had sex with someone who was drunk and therefore unable to consent. This woman was unable to consent to being filmed and the man she was raping* could not give consent to being "pleasured". Don't put her on TV, put her in jail! And tell us her name.

    Technically it's not rape, but it would be if our laws were not sexist. She enveloped him, he penetrated her. Only penetration is rape. Because she was unable to consent to penetration it's actually him that's the criminal, and being drunk is no excuse (for a man).

    1. Steven Roper

      Re: Rape!

      I've long noted the the most bigoted misandrists are mainly men, and you're a prime example. I really hope you end up falsely accused of rape or molestation and have your fucking life ruined as you so richly deserve. Filthy PC suck-up cockroaches like you are the ones undermining real efforts to fight injustice, by causing people to backlash against genuine equality movements. Spewing bigoted male-hate like you are doing is exactly what makes people think wrongly that equal-rights movements are all about hating on whites and males instead of achieving real equality, and so they naturally fight back with even more bigotry.

      So do the world a favour and just shut your fucking sanctimonious mouth, and let the reformers who actually possess more than one brain cell do their job. You aren't helping women or any other victims of injustice in your crusade to show how politically correct you are, and you're hampering real efforts to achieve equal treatment for everyone.

      1. Craigness

        Re: Rape!

        Did you read every word, or just every other word? The guy was raped (by feminist standards) but he'll see no justice because our gynocentric laws allow women to rape with impunity. In reality (not the feminist fantasy world the law reflects), there is no justice to be served here because there was consent, but in the Ched Evans case consent didn't matter...because he's a man.

  32. Hoe

    LOL So she lost, good, now I hope she gets a knock on the door from the police for her public indecency!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      > LOL So she lost, good, now I hope she gets a knock on the door from the police for her public indecency!

      And I hope you get a life. Seriously.

  33. Chris G Silver badge

    I'm amazed at the level of support for this woman, I dislike the constantly lowering common denominator for TV programs but as far as Ms K is concerned; if you can't take the public shame, don't shame yourself in public, nobody I am sure made you drink until you were drunk so the consequences of your actions are yours (and your elevated partner).

    As for these programs 'being for the middle classes to watch the proles', anybody who watches this crap and is entertained by it, has no class.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      > if you can't take the public shame, don't shame yourself in public

      Lovely cliché that one.

      > as Ms K is concerned

      As Ms K is concerned, neither you or I or likely anyone else in this blog know anything about her or her circumstances at the time, or before, or after.

  34. DanceMan

    Love............in a lift

    Love............in a lift,

    Sweet tender love.......between the

    Fourth and the fifth.

  35. streaky Silver badge

    Right to privacy..

    Whilst there's technically no right to privacy in a public space, using the video for commercial gain without permission from the "subject" of the video brings up all sorts of sideways legal issues probably not covered by OFCOM that could end up in civil court. Complaining to OFCOM isn't really going to get you anywhere in this case.

    Also don't suck people off in front of CCTV, don't get that drunk..

  36. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    friends and family had recognised her from the footage and

    judging by the language used, she'd been approached by some sharp (...)-chasers, elsewhere known as "litigation service providers" (no lawyers, God forbid, nosir).

  37. A Ghost
    Alert

    There was this girl, who got ripped to the tits

    Who decided to pee in a lift

    It soon came to be, that she appeared on tv

    But this made her a little bit miffed

    Her boyfriend was also remiss

    He should have settled, just for a kiss

    But he trembled his knee, when she sucked it to see

    While the floor was all covered with piss

  38. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    What a classy lady.

  39. JayKay

    Common Sense

    What an incredibly clear, precise verdict.

    There are probably signs everywhere saying CCTV in use and it's a public lift.

    If only more cases were dealt with as cleanly as this.

  40. A Ghost
    Big Brother

    Not their finest hour, I'm sure. But broadcasting it on national tv is lower than low.

    Is this what we have become as a nation? Titillation at others expense, so we can maybe feel a little bit of righteousness in our otherwise pathetic little lives? When I was nearly murdered, the police laughed at me for suggesting maybe, just maybe they could have a look at the cctv. 'Piss off' they said. 'You're not rich or famous, go away'. I paraphrase, of course, but that was the general gist.

    That's point one - that isn't what cctv is for. It is for catching criminals who 'really' break the social contract. These fuckwits are hardly a shining example of humanity, but they got their punishment enough without it being open season on them for national ridicule.

    Point two is this - what the chuff is TV meant to be for? For showing the misfortune of others so we can revel in it? Feel superior? Talk about dumbing it all down!

    A good few years ago when I was just getting into computer programming and had the bug real bad, I lived without a tv. But I went around a mate's house who was having a bit of a private party and everyone was dropping ecstasy. So, you know, always hating to the party pooper...

    However, I ended up watching this absolutely amazing program on television about computer programming through the ages. Starting off with Ada Lovelace and going through the decades, to the time when it was mainly women (coz men had little patience for the job) who actually hard coded the binary into machine instructions for the processors to be able to do all that adding up and subtracting malarkey. I was thoroughly fascinated, not least because I was attempting to learn assembler at the time as well. Not only had I learned something that I didn't know before, of historical importance, but I also understood how much I had learned and truly understood at a fundemental level with how computers actually work. I also learned things that I didn't understand at all. It was an amazing education. All crammed into an hour or so.

    My mates tried to tempt me with more apples from the tree and to come and join the party in the other room, but I was awestruck with wonder at what I had just experienced. Why is there no channel dedicated to this on TV? I wondered. Why isn't this shit on all the time. Why is it always that odious eastenders with their petty spites and vindictivness, the least amongst us, raised to the level of something to look up to in society. Mmm...

    That was one program. We could have stuff like that on all the time. There is a market for hungry minds out there. But no, you have to pay for that. You have to get 30,000 quid into debt for a degree that will never get you a job and won't even tell you half of what you just learned in that hour. You can't be having knowledge for free.

    Which is a shame, because it would work. People would pay good money for that kind of quality. Yes, it would take talented and dedicated people to create it. But that would mean jobs, and meaningful ones at that for many people who work in IT. Who study the history of it, who really try to understand it on a fundemental level and not just to become another wage monkey one slip of the tongue to the boss away from not being able to pay his mortgage.

    We have had it all in the last century or so. And we have squandered it. We have pissed it all away. Far worse than some silly drunk in a lift, who is the object for the daily hate on the panopticon. Well, you know what I mean.

    Some of us would like to better ourselves. Some of us have really really struggled to do that. And we ended up failing. Some of us. We could have used a little help along the way. But some of us didn't get it. Some of us have a deep deep sense of what is important and what is right though. And this girl and her boyfriend being pilloried and put in the 21st Century equivalent of the stocks for us all to throw rotten fruit and vegetables at, will not enrich my life any further. Or those of a young lad or lass who has a deep passion and commitment to learning. To being taught by those who have a deep passion for teaching. Now any man that goes into teaching is eyed with suspicion of being a pedo. Or one that can't do, so teaches. How very very wrong this society has things. How twisted people have become in their outlooks. You realise there's no easy path back from here now, don't you?

    This is what we have become. I feel truly ashamed of my fellow man. People who piss in lifts may not be the greatest amongst us. But they aren' the least amongst us either. And btw, that is why ecstasy is illegal and shall remain illegal, because it gives people deep insights into things that are truly fucking dangerous for the powers that be. You will not be educated. You will not better yourself. And you will do as you are told. Don't get ideas above your station. And they wrap it all up in a big ball of double think of getting an education and 'bettering yourself'. Meanwhile, keep on tuning into channel 4 and get your kicks there. It was wrong what they did to those people in the lift. But not as wrong as what they do to society as a whole, diminishing us and debasing us further than those we think ourselves better than.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      The Open University home-learning programmes started in 1969 - and eventually became "The Learning Zone" which was transmitted on BBC2 throughout the night. By then you could either record them - or be a night owl. The lecturers and props were often not of the best presentation quality - but they all gave insights even if you didn't want to study the subject in depth.

      They finally stopped re-transmitting them in 2007 - but the Open University logo can still be seen on many of the BBC Four science programmes. The factual content of many of those original programmes are still relevant to their subjects.

      1. streaky Silver badge

        Does sound remarkably like an OU/LZ show, I learned OOP that way when I was like 14 years old 300 years ago waking up before school..

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      > Is this what we have become as a nation?

      I just had to upvote for the raw bitterness of your post. Which sadly, is entirely justified. Wish you a good weekend, though.

  41. JustWondering
    Unhappy

    Nice!

    Drunk out of her skull and pregnant? Maybe the clip should show her face.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Nice!

      What purpose would that serve, if I may ask?

  42. John Tserkezis
    Coat

    "Us humans, we are disgusting sometimes"

    It depends on which side you stand. Or kneel, as the case may be.

    Fine, I'm going.

  43. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Just imagine

    Those poor lift maintenance guys.

    Down in the lift well fixing some kit

    Overcome with piss fumes laid down over months of dripping lift cars.

    Anyway, off to watch Dogging on Ch4 OD

  44. JulieM Silver badge

    Two wrongs don't make a right

    Relieving oneself in a lift that other people have to use is disgusting by any standard; and having any kind of sex in a situation where people who might not want to see it is at the very least selfish and inconsiderate.

    But that does not make it OK to broadcast CCTV recordings, which are made for a specific purpose -- usually, the prevention and detection of crime -- which must be displayed on signs wherever CCTV in in operation. The contract is that we agree to allow ourselves be filmed, in certain circumstances, in return for a specific benefit. And those recordings cannot be used for any other purpose, except upon the order of a Court of Law. There is such a thing as due process, and it is there for a reason.

    It's easy to see why TV companies might be tempted to make programmes as cheaply as possible. The shows are not the real product, but a mere vehicle for what they get paid for: advertisements. The only reason there are any actual programmes on TV at all is that they have got to have something to interrupt for advert breaks. And unfortunately, the same number of viewers now have more channels to choose from; facing TV companies with the need to make more programmes, even although they are still only receiving the same amount of money from advertisers. The end result is cheap programmes made to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

    But none of that gives them the right to broadcast video contrary to the stated purpose for which it was acquired. And if that stated purpose did not include "entertaining the general public by appealing to their base instincts", and no court of law ever ruled that broadcasting the video to a wider audience served a more important purpose, then Channel 4 had no business broadcasting it.

    This time around, it was something pretty abhorrent. But ask yourself this one question: Can you really be sure that there is nothing you do, that someone, somewhere might find a reason to think reprehensible?

    Because if you can't, then you're only one very small step away from being the next unwitting exhibit in the modern-day carnival freak show.

  45. RobTub

    Privacy in Public Places

    Moron - wanting privacy whilst doing things in public.

    1. Eddie Hotchkiss

      Re: Privacy in Public Places

      Yes in a public place... but behind closed doors. But in front of camera.

      I think it's the wider issue why and for what reason images are collected? For public safety and detection of crime.... Or for public entertainmemt

  46. Eddie Hotchkiss
    Big Brother

    No right to privacy but what of right not to have footage shown

    Do something in front of a camera and of course it's not going to be private.

    BUT surely if these images are for crime prevention and safety why are they touted to TV channels. It is not a choice to be filmed these days, but surely we should expect some protection from our footage being used outside of these parameters without our consent.

  47. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    For all those going on about 'doing things in public don't expect privacy'.

    How would you feel about the TV broadcasting your movements in real time: based on car number-plates being tracked by CCTV, your Oyster card, or your mobile phone. I mean, you were outside, in public, anyone could see you. So what are you complaining about?

  48. rav

    INTENTIONAL HARM BY PUBLIC SHAMING

    The video did NOT have to be aired. But it was and it was done intentionally to cause harm through public shaming.

    Certainly the video was not aired to benefit the woman in question but rather her indiscretion was used to benefit the production.

    She should be at least paid for the use of that video.

    I don;t know what lible law is in the UK but in the States libel is based on intent to do harm.

  49. Dodgy Geezer Silver badge

    Several people...

    ...have pointed out that the CCTV installation was not meant for taking candid shots of salacious behaviour to be sold to a TV station for entertainment.

    I note that CCTV operators have to register under the Data Protection Act and have a code of practice covering this sort of thing, which seems pretty obviously broken to me. If she had complained to the Data Registrar I think she would have won her case easily.

    The other justification I found fantastic was OfCom's argument that "this was not a private occasion, but occurred in a communal lift, accessible to all residents and visitors.. But it seems obvious that once the doors had closed the occupants had a reasonable expectation of privacy until the lift stopped, which usually gives one a 5-10 second warning. If OfCom are going to treat 'communal provision' as meaning that there is no privacy expectation, what about public lavatories, which are communal and accessible to all residents and visitors...?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019