GDPR right - tv programme police transcript

user1977

The transcript of your call is only personal data to the extent it includes anything which is actually personal e.g. your name, address, phone number - but I doubt they're going to include any of that. The other stuff you said isn't "personal", so I don't see what rights you'd have to stop an actor reading the same words. It's not as if it's a creative work you have copyright in.

DanDare999

lucy03 said:

I have a lot of sympathy for the OP. I can imagine many people wouldn't really want to be filmed after a car crash and it doesn't feel right that TV companies have access to 999 call information when the caller doesn't want them to have it. They may have the legal right to do it, and indeed, they could likely legally film someone lying dying on the road and show that as well. Personally, I'd complain to the Chief Constable of the police force and to my MP, there's an underlying issue here of sensational broadcasting which could cause significant distress to anyone who was involved in the incident. Given that you asked numerous times not to be filmed or involved, I'd be disappointed they ignored that. And I'm not sure that the OP has said the production company has agreed to pixelate their face in any event.

You don't believe the CC will see that complaint or even be made aware of it do you?

Undervalued

As has been said so many times, with very few exceptions, everybody has a right to film or photograph anybody or anything in a public place. You do not need their permission.

Under very limited circumstances it is occasionally possible to use the evolving and largely "judge made" privacy laws to restrict what is done with your image. Because of the costs involved and the resources of large media organisations to fight such actions this is almost entirely the province if the very rich and famous. A bit like libel - everybody has a right to sue, few can afford the risks in doing so.

TimSynths

born_again said:

The question is how would anyone know it's you or your call?

I'm defo watching Motorway Cops now on CH5 to see this one. Its on Monday evenings at 8pm but lots of catch opportunities now too.

mattyprice4004

comperinha said:

My first thought is that it's disgusting to expect you to be forced to be recorded. You could have walked away (if in public place) but then would the police have arrested you for doing this?

I'd log an official complaint with the 999 call centre who took your call, then with the police force concerned and also the TV company. They should never have filmed you or recorded your voice without your consent.

Oh give over. It’s a public place so anyone can film anything they please. 

TELLIT01

If the OP can't be identified either visually or vocally I don't understand their concern.  The transcript could apply to anybody.

400ixl

As long as they do not identify you then I don't believe there is much you can do as they will not be breaching GDPR.

They will have permission from the Police to use the transcript, the video was on public property and as long as you cannot be physically identified through visual or voice (through pixelation and actor voice over). If you were wearing a uniform they would have to obscure that, along with things like registration numbers.

Undervalued

mattyprice4004 said:

comperinha said:

My first thought is that it's disgusting to expect you to be forced to be recorded. You could have walked away (if in public place) but then would the police have arrested you for doing this?

I'd log an official complaint with the 999 call centre who took your call, then with the police force concerned and also the TV company. They should never have filmed you or recorded your voice without your consent.

Oh give over. It’s a public place so anyone can film anything they please. 

Indeed!

The argument always was (and still is) that, if it happens in public anybody walking by would see and hear it. So, what difference is there if they see a film or photograph later?

Unless the OP in this instance had actually been arrested, he was entirely free to walk away or turn his back on the camera.

The majority of news photos are taken without the subject's permission (which isn't needed). There are various codes of practice which is some cases lead to the pixilation of certain images but this is not actually a legal requirement in itself.