Science & Technology

Proceedings and privacy rulings aim to reduce facial biometrics

New York-based Clearview AI is paying to launch a facial recognition service based on publicly posted photos. The company has been the focus of numerous privacy investigations and proceedings alleging that it infringed personal rights by collecting and creating online photos. They are searchable.

On Monday, the UK’s Chief Privacy Officer will fine more than £ 17 million for collecting the company’s facial data from images posted online without the consent of the subject. There was a possibility. The ruling, which originated in a joint investigation with the Australian Intelligence Commission (OAIC), also ordered the company to stop processing data for British citizens. Another decision is expected from the Australian Government.

The decision will be made three months after the Illinois court Domination The proceedings against Clearview AI may continue and dismiss various legal defenses claimed by the company for violating the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA).

“The court supports [allowing the application of BIPA]Judge Pamela McLean Myerson is well aware that this can affect Clearview’s business model: “Inevitably, Clearview seeks to meet BIPA requirements. , You may experience a “decrease in effectiveness” of the service. This is a feature that has blindly created billions of faceprints forward, regardless of the legality of the process in all states. “

Policy catches up with technology
The privacy case highlights the problems that arise when policies eventually catch up with technology. BIPA passed in Illinois after 2008 fingerprint biometric service PayByTouch meltdownIf you use biometric information or identifiers, a private entity must notify the public, set specific terms and usage of the information, and obtain permission from the subject. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued Clearview AI in May 2020 on behalf of residents of Illinois who need to be notified about the collection of biometric data.

“”[T]Involuntary acquisition of an immutable biometric identifier can pose a greater risk to personal security, privacy, and security than acquisition of other identifiers such as names and addresses. ” ACLU said.. “And because capturing an individual’s face photo is an act, not a speech, unlike publishing or transferring a photo, much like generating a DNA profile from a genetic material shed in a water bottle. It is properly regulated by law. “

The Clearview AI tragedy highlights the challenges faced by innovative technology companies as they drive new technologies. There is no federal biometric privacy law in the United States, but five states have already passed such legislation, but only two have teeth, such as the ability to take private legal action. Says Christopher Ward, a partner at law firm Foley & Lardner. An LLP that represents companies and employers that protect themselves from biometrics-related proceedings. In addition to Illinois, California has allowed private proceedings or will begin in 2022.

“Illinois law is where all action takes place. In the short term, the main focus of the legal field is to grab money until the gravy train runs out,” Ward said, and business law is always behind technology. He added that he was taking it. .. “The law is moving much slower than technology, addressing many wage and hourly wage issues dating back to the New Deal.”

Trio of proceedings
Current, At least 3 proceedings Facebook has settled a lawsuit in Illinois to identify people as part of the “Tag Proposal” feature, while targeting Clearview AI in Illinois courts.Some of the other 21 states are considering or are considering legislation regarding the collection of biometric information and the use of bioidentifiers, Ward and its associates. Written in legal analysis..

Despite the first ruling in the Illinois State Court, the company Earn another $ 30 million A Series B round investment currently worth $ 130 million.

The company has pushed the boundaries between using the online world to impact the real world where photos posted on social media can suddenly lead. Identifying Participants in the January 6 Capitol Riot.. The British Information Commissioner argued that people need to be aware of and agree on how their information is used.

“British data protection legislation does not prevent the effective use of technology to combat crime, but we must ensure that technology providers respect and comply with the legal protection of people,” he said. Elizabeth Denham, UK Information Commissioner, said. Said in a statement.. “”[T]The evidence we have collected and analyzed suggests that Clearview AI Inc. was and continues to process large amounts of British information without our knowledge. “

The UK ruling, which is part of the Provisional Enforcement Notice, allows Clearview AI to respond to and refute the allegations. The company has already suspended its domestic business.

“The UK ICO Commissioner’s allegations are virtually and legally incorrect,” Clearview AI’s UK lawyer Kelly Hagedorn said in a statement sent to Dark Reading. “The company is considering appeals and further action. Clearview AI provides information that is open to law enforcement agencies over the Internet.”

The impact on the face recognition database is currently unclear. Almost half of the 42 federal agencies that employ law enforcement officers are currently using facial recognition technology. Report by General Accounting Office in June 2021.. Both the Illinois court ruling and the UK Privacy Commissioner’s preliminary ruling may require subject permission for face recognition before using images and faces as training data for machine learning models that enhance technology. Is increasing.

San Francisco; Portland, Oregon; Portland, Maine bans the use of facial recognition in their cities.

Ward says companies need to be aware of the risks before using facial recognition. “So far, the compliance part of using this technology isn’t too difficult for businesses,” he says. “We just need proper notice and consent. It’s really a matter of knowing what we need to do or having a good advisor as part of the team.”

Proceedings and privacy rulings aim to reduce facial biometrics Proceedings and privacy rulings aim to reduce facial biometrics

Back to top button