For the sake of life safety, more and more people are installing visual doorbell cameras for monitoring. Such devices with uninterrupted monitoring and recording functions are highly likely to collect privacy information from neighbors due to their large monitoring range. Recently, the Intermediate People's Court of Hefei City, Anhui Province, concluded a personal information protection dispute case and found that the installation of a visual doorbell camera violated citizens' privacy rights, resulting in the removal of the case. Liao is the owner of Room 02 on a certain floor of a building in a residential area in Hefei, and they live in the house together with Jiang. Chu is the owner of Room 03 on the same floor of the same building, and they live in the house together with Deng. The distance between the entrance doors of Room 02 and Room 03 is about 60 centimeters. Chu installed a visual doorbell camera on the entrance door of Room 03, which has a camera storage function and can be remotely controlled through a mobile phone. The aisle area in front of the entrance door for personnel in Room 02 is within the monitoring range of the camera. Liao and Jiang believed that the camera could monitor their personal privacy and affect their lives. Jiang immediately called the police and demanded that it be removed. After mediation by the public security organs and property management, the coordination between the two parties was unsuccessful. Liao and Jiang filed a lawsuit to the People's Court of Hefei High tech Industrial Development Zone, requesting Chu and Deng to remove the camera. The first instance court held that the case involved a visual doorbell camera, which could cover the corridor area in front of Jiang and Liao's entrance and exit. This section of the aisle area has certain particularity compared to the general public area. It is mainly used by personnel on this floor for daily entry and exit, so the objects that may be captured by the visual doorbell camera are more specific. The daily entry and exit information of Jiang and Liao that may be captured by the visual doorbell camera, including the travel personnel and their travel patterns, visitor information, etc., is directly related to Jiang and Liao's personal habits and personal and property safety, and should belong to the category of personal privacy and be protected by law. Although the original intention of installing visual doorbell cameras by Chu and Deng was to protect their own security and not to pry into the privacy of others, the recording and storage functions of visual doorbell cameras have posed a practical obstacle to the privacy and personal information protection of Jiang and Liao. Therefore, Jiang and Liao advocated for the removal of the visual doorbell camera, which is supported by the law and supported by the court. Chu and Deng appealed against the first instance judgment. After the trial by the Hefei Intermediate People's Court, it was believed that the information of citizens entering and leaving their homes, visitor information, etc., is highly related to family and property safety, personal living habits, etc., and should be regarded as a personal interest with a private nature and should be protected by law. The monitoring range of the visual doorbell camera involved in the case can cover the entrance position of Jiang and Liao. There is a possibility that personal privacy information such as activity information and visitor information of Jiang and Liao entering and exiting the residence may be captured by the visual doorbell camera. Due to the fact that the relevant monitoring and recording functions of the visual doorbell camera can be turned on and off by the user on the mobile phone, and the switch of this function cannot be controlled by Jiang or Liao. Objectively, Jiang or Liao are also unable to supervise the behavior of Chu or Deng in using the visual doorbell camera at all times. Therefore, there is a real risk of infringement of Jiang or Liao's personal privacy. The visual doorbell camera poses a threat to Jiang