Slashdot Mirror


Privacy Advocates Leave In Protest Over U.S. Facial Recognition Code of Conduct

Taco Cowboy writes: Nine privacy advocates involved in the Commerce Department process for developing a voluntary code of conduct for the use of facial recognition technology withdrew in protest over technology industry lobbyists' overwhelming influence on the process. "At a base minimum, people should be able to walk down a public street without fear that companies they've never heard of are tracking their every movement — and identifying them by name — using facial recognition technology," the privacy advocates wrote in a joint statement. "Unfortunately, we have been unable to obtain agreement even with that basic, specific premise." The Commerce Department, through its National Telecommunications and Information Administration, brought together "representatives from technology companies, trade groups, consumer groups, academic institutions and other organizations" early last year "to kick off an effort to craft privacy safeguards for the commercial use of facial recognition technology."

The goal was "to develop a voluntary, enforceable code of conduct that specifies how the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights applies to facial recognition technology in the commercial context." But after a dozen meetings, the most recent of which was last week, all nine privacy advocates who have participated in the entire process concluded that they were thoroughly outgunned. "This should be a wake-up call to Americans: Industry lobbyists are choking off Washington's ability to protect consumer privacy," Alvaro Bedoya, executive director of the Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law, said in a statement. "People simply do not expect companies they've never heard of to secretly track them using this powerful technology. Despite all of this, industry associations have pushed for a world where companies can use facial recognition on you whenever they want — no matter what you say. This position is well outside the mainstream."

4 of 161 comments (clear)

  1. Congratulations... by babymac · · Score: 1, Informative

    By pulling out of the process, they're basically ensuring they will have zero say in the outcome.

    --
    "War makes me sad." - Me
    1. Re:Congratulations... by rogoshen1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well by pulling out, they are also drastically reducing (some say by ~95%) the chance they will be held accountable for whatever deformed, mutated creature results from this unholy union.

      I imagine they didn't want to be on the hook for the next 20 odd years for something they really had no control over in the first place? Sure it's 'voluntary' and 'enforceable', but sometimes people just say things like that as a lure. When really, they have completely contrary ulterior motives.

      Gold digging special interest groups, the lot of them.

  2. CEOs by humptheElephant · · Score: 3, Informative

    People should make sure the CEOs of these companies that track you are in the database. Then follow them, photograph them and post it on google maps with date and time.

  3. Re:Ban Memories by Sique · · Score: 5, Informative
    Oh, maybe you should read the article. It's not about the receptionist knowing you or the fast food employee remembering your order. Because a) both work for companies you have a contract with and b) they don't sell this information for profit to someone else.

    This was about companies not having to enter a contract with you to identify you and sell that information, which the privacy advocates couldn't agree with.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*