IS ANYONE WATCHING?

Sep 1, 2005 12:00 PM, BY MICHAEL FICKES

The July bombings in London have highlighted again the effectiveness of closed circuit television (CCTV) as an investigative tool.

CCTV's successes have perhaps increased the numbers of cameras watching public and private places. But is watching the right word?

As law enforcement and security professionals have discovered the investigative value of cameras, more cameras are being installed that no one really intends to monitor. Instead, video from these cameras might be used to investigate incidents — after the fact. A retail mall owner, for example, might find that camera video can help prevent false slip-and-fall claims. Chances are no one would monitor video from cameras used for such a purpose.

But is a camera strategy that focuses on investigation rather than surveillance a good idea for businesses? Suppose a person wants to make a withdrawal from an ATM late one night? Suppose the person selects a particular ATM because it is equipped with surveillance cameras. A small sign might boast about the cameras in an attempt to warn off muggers. Is it not reasonable for the ATM customer to assume that someone is monitoring video from the camera at the ATM? What if the customer is robbed and pistol-whipped by two thugs?

“While no requirement may exist that a business install surveillance cameras, once it does so, it may have a duty to monitor those cameras,” says William A. McDaniel, Jr., a Baltimore attorney. “After such an incident at an ATM, the fact that the bank's security service has a video of the crime will be cold comfort to the victim. It will surely impress the jury with the negligence of the bank and the security service.”

Similar liability questions could arise when an employee decides to work late because cameras placed in the company's parking lot cause her to believe that a security officer is watching. Virtually any camera placed anywhere gives the impression that security professionals are watching. Companies that create the impression that someone is watching probably ought to watch.

So what? Should a business opt not to use cameras? If opting out on cameras is not realistic, must a business then hire security officers to monitor video from every camera?

Automated surveillance

A third alternative has begun to emerge in the form of intelligent video monitoring software. Offered by a handful of companies, intelligent video software scans the video output of a camera and looks for certain activities or images: loitering, abandoned packages, suspicious objects and abandoned vehicles, for example.

Based on algorithms or complex mathematical formulas, video monitoring software can do what human watchers cannot do: Watch video from each and every camera all the time, without losing concentration, falling asleep or taking a dinner break. “It is absolutely impossible for a human to have a one-to-one relationship with a camera,” says Brooks McChesney, CEO of Sunnyvale, Calif.-based Vidient Systems, which provides intelligent video monitoring software. “It is not going to happen, especially considering all the cameras you have out there.”

Vidient has developed software for a number of applications, including bank ATMs. “We have been asked to do three things for ATMs,” McChesney says. “We've been asked to watch for individuals that come and go repeatedly throughout the day. Second, we look for people that loiter around an ATM instead of using it and leaving. Third, we have been asked to detect actions that indicate that someone is putting a false front up on an ATM, along with a second camera positioned to steal PIN numbers.”

To date, intelligent video providers have focused on airports, other transportation facilities and the financial industry. But intelligent video software can monitor video from cameras in virtually any kind of business.

How much does the software cost? The cost can be significant. Still, intelligent software will surely cost less than the number of people that would have to be hired to watch video monitors.

Intelligent software is usually priced by camera. A mid-range intelligent software will cost about the same as a good camera. If a camera costs $400, then the camera and the intelligent video monitoring software might cost around $800. A system with 50 cameras could include intelligent video monitoring at a cost of $20,000 for the cameras and $20,0000 for the intelligent software. These prices, of course, will vary up and down depending on the vendor and the numbers of cameras.

For businesses that decide to explore this alternative, it is important to remember that people make intelligent software function properly. Someone loitering near an ATM might simply be waiting for a bus. The software will not make judgments, rather it will alert security professionals who will review the video and make judgments instead.

Users have to imagine what it is they will want this kind of software to alarm on, and that may create other issues. Returning to the ATM example, it is easy to imagine a robber threatening an ATM customer with a weapon that the camera cannot see. The video may look like nothing more than two people talking. An algorithm can be written to alarm on two people talking within a certain distance of the ATM. That would enable a security officer to take a quick look and decide whether two people were simply exchanging phone numbers or if a robbery were in progress.

---

SHARE YOUR STORY…

This page offers an opportunity for readers to share management lessons they have learned and to provide other helpful information to their peers in the industry. To offer suggestions, or to contribute to this page, contact Larry Anderson at (770) 618-0118 or e-mail landerson@primediabusiness.com

Want to use this article? Click here for options!
© 2012 Penton Media Inc.

This month in Access Control

• Targeting The Customer
• Electronic Pedigrees
• One Hero Among Many
• Who? What? When? Where? Why?
• More from September's issue