polo ralph lauren homme polo ralph lauren homme po

probe is the main instrument to obtain the video data. Video data is widely used in security, transportation and other social management, banks, shops and other business. And once it was driven on the power of private citizens, often easier to cause trouble to others and themselves.
a case from the Xuhui District Court showed that the video data in recent years, the main evidence of the increase in the number of cases. Video data as a new form of evidence, is China's However, the use of camera probe with In addition, the video data collection, dissemination and use as evidence in litigation,Polo Ralph Lauren Pas Cher, the efficiency of its legitimacy and prove that there are still much controversy.
1 camera under infringement case:

Charles Trick or glimpse of privacy?
old woman who lives in Dongan Village Chapter. July 2010, neighbors in front of Pan and the corridor because of their own often dirt, then in the room outside the side wall above and stage at the Nanyang installed a surveillance camera to see in the end who was a hoax. I did not expect the probe was installed two days to raise objections Granny chapter, the escalating war of words, alerted the district offices. Neighborhood and street several times to mediate, but their differences too. Thus, Chapter Granny Pan court to require removal of the camera.
Granny said chapter, chapter two outdoor home and Pan have a common North Terrace, Zhang old woman in the public balcony door south, towards the north, the door on a public balcony Pan East side, towards the West. Pan installed surveillance cameras covering the outside of Chapter Granny Nanyang Taiwan, the two sides of North Terrace and communal hallway stairs, so that old woman in the public parts of chapters out of the situation and drying clothes can be seen. She believes that the behavior of Mr. Pan had their privacy violated.
accusations against the woman, Mr. Ban argued previously, and utility corridor in front of their own often dirt, seriously affecting their daily lives. Chapter Granny denied it was her doing,polo ralph lauren homme, Mr. Pan reflect the neighborhood, but also because the perpetrators can not be clearly unable to resolve, the two do often quarrel. With community because of poor management, frequent theft, he installed the camera is a self-relief act, Granny is also beneficial to the chapter.
Mr. Ban also said one thing, the use of two human common regional action have occurred, for both grudges. Mr. Ban also taken after the installation of cameras to Chapter Granny throws dirt from his behavior at home, so Chapter Granny sued out of revenge and a guilty conscience. As property rights and the current actual living person, Pan think in terms of their own camera installation location, scope and shoot camera features range, angle, etc., can not peep into the privacy of Chapter Granny and did not take public positions, not constitute infringement.
Court held that civil activities should respect the ethics and shall not harm the public interest and the legitimate interests of others. Pan installing surveillance cameras to monitor the scope of the probe of a public and common areas, including old Mrs Zhang is closely related to everyday life public site, Pan's behavior has violated the privacy of Chapter Granny. Pan through the surveillance camera and collected information is for personal use, no good for the public interest, while not conducive to unity and harmony among neighbors. Accordingly, in accordance with
judges comments

case the defendant to install their own cameras on the balcony door and the probe, it seems not involved with others. However, when you exercise personal power, neither ultra vires act of public authority, can not conflict with his powers.
defendant subjectively is evidence of their own home environment monitoring, but the objective Quedui constitute an infringement of the privacy of neighbors. Citizens the right to privacy is an important part of personal protected by law. In China, for the protection of privacy, the law has clear provisions, the privacy of citizens is against the law to be subject to sanctions. The end justifies any means, but I do not know means illegal, but also out of the question of the purpose.
2 divorces under the camera:

candid video can when the evidence?
Mr. Ni is a large cast, chairman of transport equipment, a successful career, family and beauty, in the social circles of envy. Can last July, Mr. Ni's wife, Lee suddenly Mr. Ni extremely despondent, insiders are surprised inexplicable.
Ms. Lee alleged that he met with Mr. Ni for 20 years, from love, get married to do business, when they started from scratch. But now it is big business, and children abroad, and her husband are helping them out. Two years ago she was a little hint, angrily asked a friend to thorough investigation, there really evidence of cheating husband. They separated more than a year, now ask the court to divorce; the same time under the
Lee used to prove that her husband in court, evidence of cheating behavior of men and women is an intimate picture of the video disc. Ms. Lee is the man identified in court her husband Mr. Ni, the woman is the company cashier. The face of his wife's accusations, Mr. Ni said that he did the past two years, ignoring his wife's feelings, in some instances behave any errors, but certainly not of fault. Hire his wife is a hidden tape recorders to collect evidence videotaping behavior, per se, the content is also not convincing, Mr. Ni is not proven to be the reasons for alienation of mutual affection. Mr. Ni determined not to agree to a divorce.
court held that Ms. Lee asked a friend to collect video evidence, is contrary to public order and morals of the methods to obtain and can not be used as evidence. This evidence alone can not prove that marital relations have broken down, thus rejected Lee's claim.
judges comments

video data as an important prerequisite for the main evidence is the video installation and use of the probe must be legal. Citizen's personal needs and interpersonal communication is the scope of private power, the power in the private areas shall comply with camera probe of public order and good morals of society, the law no paradox.
video means the case law provided by the plaintiff, the plaintiff recorded a candid hire someone to steal does not in itself illegal. Under the existing legal framework, the video data is obtained by criminal means or method to law prohibits methods or means of obtaining, or contrary to good morals to the means or methods to obtain,polo ralph lauren femme, and can not be used as evidence. Ms. Lee is the evidence provided by the video intimacy between men and women, belonging to citizens of Because video data can restore true, but also editing, the video can not prove harmful to society actors, others can not be used as evidence. 相关的主题文章：

http://www.beatsbydreusa.com
http://www.beatsbydre.com

borse gucci outlet borse gucci outlet borse gucci

polo ralph lauren big pony polo ralph lauren big pony Polo Ralph Lauren Pas Cher

ralph lauren france polo ralph lauren homme ralph lauren france Accept corrupt o