Body Cam

[RustyRef]

DSARs can only be submitted to Data Controllers. An individual referee is not a Data Controller any more than a person taking photos of players with their names on their shirts is.

If footage from a body cam is submitted to a CFA (or the police) for disciplinary purposes then a DSAR could be issued to them and I'm sure they have processes in place to accommodate them.

Veo (and all the clubs using them) seem to have managed these issues without fuss.

That isn't completely right, DSARs can be submitted to anyone, the role of data controller is there to make it easy to identify who should be doing it and for accountability. Individuals can be subject to GDPR, the only real exceptions that would protect an individual are where the data relates to personal / household activities, law enforcement and national security. There's an article covering GDPR and individuals below.

Veo have a publicly accessible privacy policy that covers, amongst other things, disclosure and transfer of personal data, erasure and retention of personal data, and data subject rights. A referee is going to have none of this, and that is my point, does that mean that the FA or CFAs would need to take on that responsibility.

Don't get me wrong, I can't see there being many situations where a player or club would demand copies of video and images showing them. But they could, and I can't see the FA endorsing and putting their name behind a body cam pilot unless they are absolutely watertight.

Does GDPR Apply to Individuals?

Does GDPR Apply to Individuals? How GDPR Relates to you Personally. Blog by Information Security Awareness Training provider Hut Six Security

www.hutsix.io

 

[Ben448844]

Back to the debate at hand, I just don't see an insurmountable issue with GDPR etc. Everyone has camera phones, CCTV etc. I see no reason that a trial cannot take place. Why would we not want to give this a go considering the ineptitude of previous attempts to improve behaviour at football? I'm not a big fan of Refsupport, I think alot of what they do is devisive as it goes behind highlighting ref abuse, but I'd back a trial of body cams no matter who's fronting it. There's bigger issues at hand like improving the safety of referees and increasing our numbers.

 

[PinnerPaul]

There are two different things. Just because lots of clubs record games doesn't mean they are fully aware of the rules and regulations.

If the laws were changed to allow body cams I'm pretty sure the governing bodies would need to make sure that any recordings are properly stored, secured, and deleted as appropriate. It probably isn't likely to happen, but if you record a player and he is personally identifiable in that recording (for example shirt number being matched with online team sheet) he has a legal right to request access to that recording via a DSAR. Not sure who you would issue the DSAR to, would be tricky for an individual referee, but perhaps it would have to be the CFA. Don't know the answers, but it isn't as simple as people being allowed to record, it is what happens to that recording afterwards that is the bigger issue.

Yes agree, which is what I said in my conversation with James. ignoring the clubs and main stream broadcasters, which as James says is probably covered by FA/Club rules, you still have fans recording images at every game. As we have established that isn't illegal per se, so follows that merely having an active body cam wouldn't contravene any laws, complete waste of time in my view, but can't see them being 'illegal' per se.

 

[JamesL]

Yes agree, which is what I said in my conversation with James. ignoring the clubs and main stream broadcasters, which as James says is probably covered by FA/Club rules, you still have fans recording images at every game. As we have established that isn't illegal per se, so follows that merely having an active body cam wouldn't contravene any laws, complete waste of time in my view, but can't see them being 'illegal' per se.

The only way I see it working is that they are personal devices. And that the information cannot be shared under any circumstances unless under schedule 2 of the Gdpr regulations. Which wont apply to county FAs. So could only be shared to police basically.
So there will have to be a data sharing agreement, between the referee and the county FA, so someone somewhere will have to hold a privacy statement.
Im sure there will be better legal boffins than us lot that can thrash it out but its oseemingly not as straight forward as strap up and go.

 

[PinnerPaul]

The only way I see it working is that they are personal devices. And that the information cannot be shared under any circumstances unless under schedule 2 of the Gdpr regulations. Which wont apply to county FAs. So could only be shared to police basically.
So there will have to be a data sharing agreement, between the referee and the county FA, so someone somewhere will have to hold a privacy statement.
Im sure there will be better legal boffins than us lot that can thrash it out but its oseemingly not as straight forward as strap up and go.

Yep, you're probably correct, lets stick to offside!

 

[Trip]

That isn't completely right, DSARs can be submitted to anyone, the role of data controller is there to make it easy to identify who should be doing it and for accountability. Individuals can be subject to GDPR,

You cannot submit a DSAR to an individual. Even the article you linked to says that.

 

[JamesL]

You cannot submit a DSAR to an individual. Even the article you linked to says that.

The employed/self employed thing will probably rear its head here.
The question won't be you as an individual but you as an individual who is offering a service ie refereeing, and during that provided service collecting and storing data.

 

[Trip]

The employed/self employed thing will probably rear its head here.
The question won't be you as an individual but you as an individual who is offering a service ie refereeing, and during that provided service collecting and storing data.

No, the DSAR can only be served on an organisation. That organisation may consist of only one person (in the case of a company for example) and individuals can certainly be personally liable. But a referee is not a company or an organisation of any sort and you would have no legal obligation to respond to a subject access request any more than you would as a spectator taking photos.

 

[JamesL]

No, the DSAR can only be served on an organisation. That organisation may consist of only one person (in the case of a company for example) and individuals can certainly be personally liable. But a referee is not a company or an organisation of any sort and you would have no legal obligation to respond to a subject access request any more than you would as a spectator taking photos.

Aren't they?
We are self employed by the Fa's own description.

Even still I don't think it's the DSAR thay is the main stumbling block.

The issues are the basic Gdpr principles about collecting, storing, processing, and sharing of the info.

If you collect data, irrespective of if you are an organisation or not you still need to process it lawfully.

 

[Trip]

Aren't they?
We are self employed by the Fa's own description.

I think you're referring to a legal decision that PGMOL referees are self-employed and therefore PGMOL does not have duty to deduct tax/NI when they pay them.

That decision did not apply to grassroots referees. (And it has in any case been overturned at appeal. PGMOL referees are employees.)

Grassroots referees do not have any employment status when they officiate amateur football. Individuals must of course abide by data protection legislation but there is nothing in that legislation that obliges an individual to respond to a subject access request.

 

[JamesL]

I think you're referring to a legal decision that PGMOL referees are self-employed and therefore PGMOL does not have duty to deduct tax/NI when they pay them.

That decision did not apply to grassroots referees. (And it has in any case been overturned at appeal. PGMOL referees are employees.)

Grassroots referees do not have any employment status when they officiate amateur football. Individuals must of course abide by data protection legislation but there is nothing in that legislation that obliges an individual to respond to a subject access request.

PGMOL is different as for starters there is a contract.

I suggest you ask you county FA to confirm the terms of your engagement. I can't find any thing to suggest we don't have employment status. Or one better ask how HMRC view you

As far as I see I am paid to provide a service. I can choose, to an extent, who to and where I provide those services (that's called freelancing) and the tax man taxes my earning as if I were so.

But we are entering a totally different topic here. Its another factor to it the whole who is the data controller and who can share the information and where

 

[Trip]

As far as I see I am paid to provide a service. I can choose, to an extent, who to and where I provide those services (that's called freelancing) and the tax man taxes my earning as if I were so.

I'm not sure how it works above level 5 but I'm not paid for providing a service. If I'm paid at all it's to compensate me for my expenses.

The tax position is completely separate from employment status. For example, rental income is taxable, it doesn't imply employment.

In any case, the whole DSAR thing is a total red-herring in my opinion. Individuals have no obligation to service them.

 

[SpecsSaver66]

I would wear one if supplied and I have ticked 'Yes' in the poll but they arent really going to solve many of the real issues facing refs,grassroots in particular. With football the behaviours down the age groups and pyramids all come from the top and unless the abuse to officials in the professional game is not tolerated then it wont get any better elsewhere.

 

[SpecsSaver66]

I was just looking at swfc t&cs. It says can't take recording equipment in or broadcast but can have mobile for personal use.

If you attend a professional football match you are being filmed for at least part of the time by the stadium monitoring equipment and a tv company filming the game. While they may not be filming you specifically that footage is available to authorities if needed.

 

[RustyRef]

I would wear one if supplied and I have ticked 'Yes' in the poll but they arent really going to solve many of the real issues facing refs,grassroots in particular. With football the behaviours down the age groups and pyramids all come from the top and unless the abuse to officials in the professional game is not tolerated then it wont get any better elsewhere.

They won't be supplied, if it gets approved referees will have to buy them.

 

[SpecsSaver66]

They won't be supplied, if it gets approved referees will have to buy them.

Can I change my vote to 'No' then? Lol.