Editing Friend app (section)

==Legal & regulatory environment==
The Illinois   Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA)   requires entities to obtain written consent before collecting biometric identifiers, provide retention schedules, & limit data storage.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/fulltext.asp?Name=095-0994 |title=Biometric Information Privacy Act |website=Illinois General Assembly |date=2008 |access-date=2025-10-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251001000000/https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/fulltext.asp?Name=095-0994 |archive-date=2025-10-01}}</ref> The Illinois Supreme Court’s 2019 *Rosenbach* decision expanded standing for consumers to sue.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.americanbar.org/groups/antitrust_law/resources/source/2025-june/biometric-privacy-litigation/ |title=The Who, Why, and Where of Biometric Privacy Litigation |website=American Bar Association |date=2025-06-01 |access-date=2025-10-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251001000000/https://www.americanbar.org/groups/antitrust_law/resources/source/2025-june/biometric-privacy-litigation/ |archive-date=2025-10-01}}</ref>  

Analysts warn that devices like Friend raise risks under BIPA & similar laws, especially when data is used for AI training.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.lexisnexis.com/pdf/practical-guidance/ai/biometric-privacy-and-ai-legal-dev.pdf |title=Biometric Privacy and AI Legal Developments |website=LexisNexis |date=2025 |access-date=2025-10-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251001000000/https://www.lexisnexis.com/pdf/practical-guidance/ai/biometric-privacy-and-ai-legal-dev.pdf |archive-date=2025-10-01}}</ref> Federal & state regulators increasingly classify biometric identifiers as sensitive data requiring special protection.<ref name="KPMG">{{cite web |url=https://kpmg.com/us/en/articles/2025/ai-and-privacy-a-look-at-biometric-tech-and-data-reg-alert.html |title=AI and Privacy: A Look at Biometric Tech & Data |website=KPMG |date=2025 |access-date=2025-10-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251001000000/https://kpmg.com/us/en/articles/2025/ai-and-privacy-a-look-at-biometric-tech-and-data-reg-alert.html |archive-date=2025-10-01}}</ref>

===Precedents & industry comparisons===
The Clearview AI litigation demonstrates how courts treat unauthorized biometric collection. In 2025, Clearview agreed to a US$51.75 million settlement resolving claims under BIPA.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.regulatoryoversight.com/2025/04/51-75m-settlement-in-clearview-ai-biometric-privacy-litigation-illustrates-creative-resolution-for-startups-facing-parallel-litigation-and-enforcement-action/ |title=$51.75M Settlement in Clearview AI Biometric Privacy Litigation |website=Regulatory Oversight |date=2025-04-12 |access-date=2025-10-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251001000000/https://www.regulatoryoversight.com/2025/04/51-75m-settlement-in-clearview-ai-biometric-privacy-litigation-illustrates-creative-resolution-for-startups-facing-parallel-litigation-and-enforcement-action/ |archive-date=2025-10-01}}</ref>  

Competitor devices, such as the Limitless pendant, advertise a more limited data policy, not permitting ambient biometric capture.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.limitless.ai/privacy |title=Privacy – Limitless |website=Limitless.ai |date=2025 |access-date=2025-10-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251001000000/https://www.limitless.ai/privacy |archive-date=2025-10-01}}</ref>