Who owns the data?

Your workspace owns every inspection, template, media file, and audit log. Virtual Inspection Pro acts as a processor under your instructions, not as an owner of your content.

We do not sell customer data and do not use your inspection media to train third-party models.

Bulk export inspections and media as ZIP archives, or stream them out continuously via API and webhooks. Templates export as portable JSON.

Exports include the verification metadata and audit trail, not just the raw files — which is what makes them useful outside the platform.

The practical test of ownership is whether you can leave with everything intact. Exported records keep their provenance metadata and integrity hashes, so evidence value survives migration.

A DPA formalises the processor relationship, subprocessors are disclosed, and residency options let you keep data in a specific region.

Who owns inspection data in Virtual Inspection Pro? You do: your workspace owns every inspection, media file, template, and audit log. For a government agency, insurer, lender, or property team, the practical next step is to name the person responsible for those records. Assign responsibility for approving access, responding to record requests, maintaining retention schedules, and authorizing exports.

Workspace ownership is not a blanket permission to distribute everything captured during an inspection. Images may contain occupants, identification documents, or unrelated personal belongings. Before sharing records with a contractor or another department, review the purpose, recipient, and minimum information needed. Keep the original record under your organization's retention policy and prepare a separate disclosure copy when redaction is appropriate. Ask your privacy officer, records manager, or counsel to resolve conflicting access, privacy, or preservation obligations.

Virtual Inspection Pro lets you export anytime as ZIP archives, JSON, or through the API—there is no lock-in. Turn that data export no lock in commitment into an operational check: choose a completed inspection with media, a template, and an audit log; export the relevant records; and compare the result against a written inventory. Confirm that files open and that your team can associate each item with the correct inspection.

Before a migration, ask the receiving system's owner to test a representative sample. Export availability does not establish that another system can recreate every relationship or workflow without transformation. Document field mappings, retain an untouched export, and investigate missing or ambiguous items before retiring the original workflow. NIST's forensic integration guidance provides general principles for preserving integrity and documenting evidence handling; it does not certify a particular export or establish its legal acceptability.

Data ownership and processing responsibilities are different questions. When reviewing a data processor agreement, identify which entity determines processing purposes and which entity processes information on its behalf. Where GDPR applies and a controller-processor relationship exists, Article 28 specifies required contractual terms. Do not assume that the workspace ownership statement alone answers every privacy or procurement question.

Have procurement and privacy reviewers check the agreement's scope, documented instructions, confidentiality requirements, security obligations, subprocessor provisions, assistance with individual rights, and arrangements for returning or deleting personal data when services end. Clarify how retention requirements and preservation holds will be handled. Request written answers about export procedures and any unresolved contractual terms before approval. These are review steps, not claims about Virtual Inspection Pro's contract language, hosting locations, security certifications, deletion behavior, or regulatory status. Your organization's reviewers should determine which requirements apply to the actual deployment.

Consider a municipal inspector reviewing a remote inspection before a department migrates its records. The workspace exports the inspection materials, but a photograph does not clearly show a required connection. Ownership and portability preserve the ability to retain and examine that record; they do not make the underlying observation complete. The inspector should document the uncertainty and request additional evidence rather than infer compliance from an available file.

ICC's remote virtual inspection resources provide general context for planning remote inspections. A qualified reviewer should decide whether follow-up remote observation is sufficient or an in-person visit is necessary, particularly when work is concealed, the view is obstructed, or conditions raise safety concerns. During migration, route mismatched records, unclear chronology, or questionable file integrity to a human reviewer. Preserve the original materials and document the resolution without silently replacing the historical record.