Global Mall Operator Starts Reading License Plates

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Global Mall Operator Starts Reading License Plates

Posted by timothy on Saturday September 10, 2011 @03:11PM from the well-aren't-you-lucky? dept.

First time accepted submitter skegg writes "Westfield Group, one of the largest shopping centre (mall) operators in the world, has launched a find-my-car iPhone app. The system uses a series of license plate reading cameras dotted throughout their multi-level car parks. Westfield said police could also use it to find stolen or unregistered vehicles. (Hello, slippery slope.) Initially launched in just one Sydney centre, it will be rolled-out to others if the trial is successful."

40 of 301 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Slippery slope? by Nidi62 · 2011-09-10 15:14 · Score: 3, Insightful

How is this a slippery slope? The cars are parked in a public place, with license plates easily viewable. There is no expectation of privacy in this case.

--
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
1. Re:Slippery slope? by MalleusEBHC · 2011-09-10 15:24 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  While there is no expectation of privacy in public, there is a huge practical difference between automated tracking systems and manpower surveillance. A few well placed cameras could track as many cars as thousands of people could.
  Besides the law enforcement slippery slope, what about the commercial privacy concerns? It's not a stretch that such a system could be used to track how long you spend at the mall and where you went, especially if it were combined with a facial recognition system inside the mall. I know some of this is already possible just by tracking credit card purchases, but opening up yet another more invasive avenue for data collection is not something I welcome.
2. Re:Slippery slope? by Nidi62 · 2011-09-10 15:27 · Score: 2
  
  Your second point is easily solved: don't park in their deck. You can always park in the lot of one of those little strip shopping centers that always surround malls, and simply walk across the street. Consider it as an opt-out.
  
  --
  The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
3. Re:Slippery slope? by nmb3000 · 2011-09-10 15:34 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  How is this a slippery slope? The cars are parked in a public place, with license plates easily viewable. There is no expectation of privacy in this case.
  I believe the slippery slope the submitter is referring to is the widespread dissemination of license plate reading cameras. As with most technologies, it can be used for both good and ill.
  For example, it can be a convenience. This article is one example (helping people find their cars). Another is for controlled-access areas such as the university I attend. They recently switched from a RFID-style windshield sticker to these license plate cameras, claiming it will be faster to open the gates (false), that it would be less prone to failure (also false).
  The slippery part of these devices is that it's all to easy to re-purpose them. Very soon after installing the cameras at the controlled-access gates my university started mounting them on curbside free-standing poles all over campus. It is almost impossible to drive through campus (which I acknowledge is private property) without having your plate scanned. I'm sure this has somehow been sold as "keeping campus safe." Of course, what it really is, is a waste of money and an erosion of privacy.
  The same type of scenario could easily happen over an entire city once this technology becomes common enough. Pretty soon there's enough coverage that law enforcement (or anyone else, for that matter) might be able to pay for (or coerce via legislation) private owners to give them access to the data. Now "criminals" can be caught by simply driving past that Chevron station on the corner and detailed data mining of your personal travel habits is effortless and completely legal. The entire vehicle-owning public is suddenly under constant, real-time surveillance.
  I realize there is limited expectation of privacy in public places, and that license plates are easily visible on the outside of your vehicle. That doesn't change that this is an erosion of privacy. Just as stalking a person all over a city isn't legal, doing effectively the same thing via electronic means shouldn't be either (without a valid warrant).
  </tinfoil hat>
  
  --
  "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
  /)
4. Re:Slippery slope? by Belial6 · 2011-09-10 15:52 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Yes, there IS an expectation of privacy. It is privacy through obscurity. When I am in a crowd of 100,000, I very reasonably expect to be LESS trackable than when I am sitting in my home alone. Pretty much every single person on the planet also has this expectation. They don't expect to have the person next to them not see them, but they do expect that anyone that knows them, or is investigating them will not see them.
  
  The meme of "Your is public, so have no expectation of privacy" is entirely false, and repeating it doesn't make it true.
5. Re:Slippery slope? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-10 15:58 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  ah, the legal apologist. to them, as long as it's legal, it's moral, just, and completely harmless to the freedoms and civil rights of citizens. as we all know, the legal system in this country (and others) is completely flawless when it comes to social justice and health of the human psyche. there are no psychopaths at the top manipulating the whole mess to their advantage by passing laws which are psychologically and sociologically unhealthy for individuals as well as society at large.
  case in point, there's a big fucking difference between no expectation of privacy, and having your license plate number used to track your every move from place to place. yes, there IS a slippery slope here.. it starts with the parent companies which push their surveillance policies out to the rest.. eventually, the government just mandates it everywhere .
6. Re:Slippery slope? by stephanruby · 2011-09-10 16:04 · Score: 2
  
  It's not a true "opt-out" unless the mall cops grab your groin or strip search you.
7. Re:Slippery slope? by epyT-R · 2011-09-10 16:09 · Score: 2
  
  so when some entity uses said information about your car to back you into a corner, you're a-ok with that?
  you're cherry picking statistics which is a red flag indicator for someone who'd rather push his favorite social agenda than speak the complete truth. there are LOTS of things which are 'extremely expensive in multiple ways, for the individual, the society, and the human race at large.' that doesn't justify being treated like criminals.
8. Re:Slippery slope? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2011-09-10 16:17 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The cars are parked in a public place, with license plates easily viewable. There is no expectation of privacy in this case.
  Ah, but there [i]is[/i] an expectation of privacy.
  The general population does not expect that the mere act of going shopping will cause the date, location and duration of such normal activities to be permanently recorded by a large, well-funded organization in a database with practically no access controls.
  Furthermore, the american jurisprudence (Katz v United States) which established the concept of "no privacy in public spaces" was written in 1967 - a time when wide-spread surveillance and, more importantly, essentially infinite-sized databases were only the stuff of science fiction.
  Technology has progressed and the law needs to catch up.
  
  --
  When information is power, privacy is freedom.
9. Re:Slippery slope? by RobinEggs · 2011-09-10 16:26 · Score: 2
  
  And hypothetical complaints about a mysterious, nefarious "some entity" using the system to "back me into a corner" isn't pushing some sort of agenda?
  
  Not all surrender of privacy and anonymity amounts to being treated like a criminal; not all systems will inevitably and automatically be used in most seditious, conspiracy-oriented ways.
  
  The "complete truth" you want me to speak is not an objective, independent truth; it's a personal, hypothetical fear of yours, and every bit as much of an "agenda" as what I'm talking about.
10. Re:Slippery slope? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · 2011-09-10 16:26 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Very soon after installing the cameras at the controlled-access gates my university started mounting them on curbside free-standing poles all over campus. It is almost impossible to drive through campus (which I acknowledge is private property) without having your plate scanned.
  
  If it is private property, you have no legal requirement to display your license plate. I'd very much like to purchase a license-plate obscurer that could be hooked up to a GPS unit so that it would automatically cover up my plate as I left the public roads for a parking-lot or wherever.
  FWIW, I read a couple of years back that Target was surreptitiously deploying such ANPR cameras to all of their parking lots. I can't easily dig up the article via google because, as you might imagine, "target" is way too generic of a search term, however "Target CSI" yields some related info that is disturbing.
  
  --
  When information is power, privacy is freedom.
11. Re:Slippery slope? by RobinEggs · 2011-09-10 17:01 · Score: 2
  
  If you read what I've written I'm not actually justifying this system at all; my point all along has been more general than that. I simply believe that cars aren't a strictly private, strictly personal possession and I'm tired of people pretending that they are. Cars physically interconnect all our lives and, with their massive fiscal and environmental costs, they directly connect all of our destinies, as well. Our entire lives, at least in the US, are designed around then. I'm not arguing for the abolition of cars, and I don't actually care one way or another about this particular issue; I'm just tired of ignorant individualists, many of whom border on anarchists, who believe they have a right to unlimited, unrestricted use of automobiles. They're a public good, not a private right.
12. Re:Slippery slope? by inkscapee · 2011-09-10 17:05 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Actually, this isn't a public place. You're parking on their property. Don't like it, don't go there. It's that simple.
  Just walk away has always been stupid advice. It doesn't change anything. Why are there always a bunch of dummies who preach this? We should always speak up and protest abusive practices. Following your 'don't go there' advice doesn't improve anything, it just narrows our options and encourages this sort of crap.
13. Re:Slippery slope? by Runaway1956 · 2011-09-10 17:37 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The thing is, you accept that surveillance is acceptable, and normal. Some of us do not. It is none of the police department's business where I go, what I do, who I see, or how long I might meet with any person. None of their business. Basically, widespread surveillance relieves the police of doing real police work.
  I can justify surveillance inside of a business place that is commonly subject to armed robbery and/or shoplifting. I cannot justify surveillance of public streets, parking logs, and business places that aren't commonly targeted by thieves.
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
14. Re:Slippery slope? by iamhassi · 2011-09-10 17:57 · Score: 2
  
  How is this a slippery slope?
  
  It's a slippery slope because I can use it to find out my wife is still at the mall and I can slippery slope my way to my favorite websites.
  
  I, for one, welcome our new wife monitoring systems.
  
  --
  my karma will be here long after I'm gone
15. Re:Slippery slope? by Antarius · 2011-09-10 18:17 · Score: 2
  
  Except that this is Sydney Australia, not Sydney Florida.
  
  Paintball guns here require a firearms license. Such a low population of the country has said license, that they'd be able to quickly catch and prosecute the perpetrators for illegally carrying "firearms" in public.
  
  Yeah, a paintball or BB-gun will get you in the shit. =p
16. Re:Slippery slope? by dbet · 2011-09-10 18:53 · Score: 2
  
  Should it be illegal? It should be fine if you write down stuff on a notepad and keep it to yourself. If you publish the info or make it available to anyone else, you should spend time in jail.
  
  The same was true (may still be) of people who used scanners to hear neighbor's wireless phone calls. It was legal to use a scanner, it was illegal to share anything you heard.
  
  Else one could say, record every car that parked at planned parenthood and share the info, or worse, threaten to share it unless payments were made.
  
  And no, it's not okay for police to do it either unless they're targeting a specific person for a specific crime.
17. Re:Slippery slope? by taustin · 2011-09-10 20:32 · Score: 2
  
  If enough people don't go there, the company that runs the mall will go out of business. If that doesn't happen, then, clearly, the majority clearly just don't care. Vent about your pet peeve all you want - you have that right - but don't expect other people to care about stuff they don't care about.
18. Re:Slippery slope? by DarwinSurvivor · 2011-09-10 21:51 · Score: 2
  
  I think you a verb somewhere...
19. Re:Slippery slope? by QuantumG · 2011-09-10 22:48 · Score: 2
  
  protest
  People keep using this word.. I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean what they think it means.
  You can petition your government for grievances.. you can take your grievances with Woolworths and shove 'em where the sun don't shine. Ya know, we tried to give you a word that means what you want.. "boycott", but that actually requires you to go without and that's not what you want is it? You just want to whine and throw tantrums when you don't get your way.
  
  --
  How we know is more important than what we know.
20. Re:Slippery slope? by drinkypoo · 2011-09-11 00:03 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  The thing is, you accept that surveillance is acceptable, and normal.
  Accepting reality is a sign of sanity and intelligence.
  
  Some of us do not.
  The converse is also true.
  
  It is none of the police department's business where I go, what I do, who I see, or how long I might meet with any person. None of their business. Basically, widespread surveillance relieves the police of doing real police work.
  No, no it doesn't, because in and of itself that should not be enough to convict you of anything. Also, this is not the police knowing where you are, but a mall knowing where you are. You're on their property and they want to be able to find your car. I personally want Trek-esque location services in my house... you know, "computer, locate Runaway1956." And if you don't like me knowing what room you're in, don't come into my house. And if you don't like me knowing where you're parked, don't park on my property. It's my property, and I have a right to know what's going on there.
  Now, I would be quite upset to learn they're giving this information to the police without a subpoena, and I wouldn't want to shop there in that case.
  
  I cannot justify surveillance of public streets, parking logs, and business places that aren't commonly targeted by thieves.
  Oddly, public streets, parking lots, and business places are all commonly targeted by thieves. I know that's now how you meant your sentence to be parsed, but I have a logical parser, not a directed one.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
21. Re:Slippery slope? by Runaway1956 · 2011-09-11 02:22 · Score: 2
  
  "If you drive on a public road you've already agreed to give up many of your rights. This is a non-issue."
  "Mr. Runaway, you may not drive on our highways, unless and until you agree to give up some constitutionally guaranteed rights. Do you wish to travel on our highways?"
  Nooo, that's not coercion at all, now is it? Agreeing to give up your rights, and being coerced into such an "agreement" are not the same things.
  
  --
  "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
22. Re:Slippery slope? by GameboyRMH · 2011-09-11 10:42 · Score: 2
  
  Bad news: The guy was wearing shades and a baseball cap, so the cameras can't see his face.
  Camera advantage nullified.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
23. Re:Slippery slope? by GameboyRMH · 2011-09-11 10:48 · Score: 2
  
  Yes, because cameras don't sleep, blink, aren't limited to looking at one place at one time, and can be hooked up to facial/license plate recognition databases. Cameras DO make it a bigger problem.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Skarecrow77 · 2011-09-10 15:17 · Score: 2

1. At least remember what vague part of the lot you parked in. That will help.
2. (to actually be done before step 1) Purchase and place one of those antenna ball things, a fairly uncommon one in a striking color (yellow, orange, or neon pink all work well), and look for that.
Assuming you didn't park next to a van or an H2, that thing should stick out like a sore thumb.
My wife's old car had a bright yellow winnie-the-pooh antenna ball and that thing was always easy to spot no matter how crowded the lot.
1. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by Dachannien · 2011-09-10 16:01 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  2. (to actually be done before step 1) Purchase and place one of those antenna ball things, a fairly uncommon one in a striking color (yellow, orange, or neon pink all work well), and look for that.
  This is a great idea, and I hope everyone follows your advice.
  Everyone.
2. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by artor3 · 2011-09-10 16:08 · Score: 2
  
  The fact that you seem to think that 50% of a population must be below average says more about your (lack of) knowledge about statistics than anything else.
3. Re:Want to find your car in a parking lot? by nospam007 · 2011-09-10 16:14 · Score: 2
  
  "...I've never found it at all difficult to find my car simply by remembering where I parked it.
  People owning a smartphone to use their app can as well just take a picture of the lot/row/deck number.
  This investment ain't for helping the customer, that's for sure.
Westfield not just in Australia by molo · 2011-09-10 15:32 · Score: 4, Informative

Westfield also operates dozens of malls in the US and a number in New Zealand as well. See this list on wikipedia.
-molo

--
Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
This is not news by Dan+B. · 2011-09-10 15:34 · Score: 3, Interesting

While the iDevice app maybe new, the camera-in-car-park scenario has been operating in at least one place that I know (and use) quite frequently; Brisbane Airport.
When you drive in, it images and OCRs your plate at the boom-gate, printing your rego on the ticket. Each car park has a camera pointed at it with a large multi colour light that reads - Red; park occupied, Green; park vacant, and Blue; park about to be vacated. When you pay for/validate your ticket, the light above your car goes from red to blue, and as soon as you pull out, it flicks to green.
I'm all for this tech, it makes park hunting so much easier, plus you would be amazed at the number of stolen cars that are stolen for the express purpose of the criminal driving it to their destination (such as the airport or shopping centre) with no intention of doing anything with the car other than avoiding a taxi fare. Thousands of stolen cars are recovered from parking lots each year, undamaged and usually, unlocked!

--
Dan. -- So what if it's spelt wrong, nobody's perfect
1. Re:This is not news by MichaelSmith · 2011-09-10 20:30 · Score: 2
  
  Paid on street parking now uses a detector embedded in the road to sense a vehicle. In a one hour spot it will send a message for a parking inspector after an hour. Maybe the same sort of sensor detects occupied spaces.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
2. Re:This is not news by zoloto · 2011-09-10 20:58 · Score: 2
  
  Wow, you're totally clueless. How about this: It's no ones damned business where I go or what I do or purchase. That information shouldn't be stored, archived, collected and perused through.
Thanks for the tip. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-10 15:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

I'm thinking if you're too irresponsible to remember where you left one of your most valuable possessions that you are also too irresponsible to be trusted with the use of that possession.
Criminals can get a five finger discount by millsey · 2011-09-10 16:03 · Score: 3, Insightful

Use the app at the touch of your fingertips to see if your neighbor is out and take what you want!
Private company can't connect plate with owner by schwit1 · 2011-09-10 16:30 · Score: 2

As I read it the mall folks have no access to owner data. This makes the data little different than tracking make/model/color/year. My question is how long do they keep the tag data?
The biggest problem is not privacy related by SuperKendall · 2011-09-10 16:46 · Score: 2

While everyone goes on about loss of privacy, the biggest problem I see is this:
If you cannot generally remember where you put your car, how are you going to remember the random cryptic string of digits that is your license plate to look up your car on this system?
For better or worse, it does seem like the system may be much more helpful to police than visitors.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Re:There's an app for that by PPH · 2011-09-10 17:00 · Score: 2

A follow up app was launched called "Find My Cheating Wife".
No need. I know right where your cheating wife is.
P.S. Now there's two of you telling me to "Slow Down Cowboy!"

--
Have gnu, will travel.
Not News, Welcome to the UK 2001 by Kr3m3Puff · 2011-09-10 18:37 · Score: 4, Informative

Number plate reading cameras in public car parks have been around in the UK for a number of years and the government hands for even longer. Any time spent in London your vehicle will be scanned both publicly and privately. A visit to almost any airport in the UK will result in that and Heathrow Airport has had the "find my car" stuff for quite a while.
If it is a slippery slope, it is one that is already been in the wild for a long long time. Time to go tilt at some other windmills.

--
D.O.U.O.S.V.A.V.V.M.
Old news: UK already tracks plates by wdef · 2011-09-10 20:34 · Score: 2

You other Western countries are so behind in Orwellian surveillance. As usual, the UK has already been doing it:

The UK has an extensive automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) CCTV network. Police and security services use it to track UK vehicle movements in real time. The resulting data are stored for 5 years in the National ANPR Data Centre to be analyzed for intelligence and to be used as evidence.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police-enforced_ANPR_in_the_UK
The United Kingdom: Orwell got the year wrong.
1. Re:Old news: UK already tracks plates by dakameleon · 2011-09-11 13:58 · Score: 2
  
  This, and the fact that toll roads and petrol pumps ("gas stations") have had this kind of technology for years means this should be a total non-story. The only innovation is that they're admitting the police might use the data.
  
  --
  Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.