Flock License Plate Readers: Difference between revisions

'''Flock License Plate Readers''' (previously known as '''Flock Safety Falcon'''<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.flocksafety.com/devices/falcon|title=Falcon|work=Flock Safety|access-date=2024-12-06|archive-url=https://archive.ph/UjKM5|archive-date=2024-12-06|url-status=dead}}</ref>), are a network of AI-powered surveillance cameras that continuously record vehicle data for law enforcement agencies. The system operates in over 5,000 communities across 49 U.S. states, performing over 20 billion vehicle scans monthly.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/06/flock-safetys-feature-updates-cannot-make-automated-license-plate-readers-safe|title=Flock Safety's Feature Updates Cannot Make Automated License Plate Readers Safe|work=Electronic Frontier Foundation|date=2025-06-01|access-date=2025-08-23}}</ref>

Residents & taxpayers have no mechanism to opt-out of Flock's surveillance network. The cameras operate 24/7 in public spaces, recording all passing vehicles regardless of consent. Unlike traditional security cameras that may be avoided by choosing different routes, Flock's expanding network of over 40,000 cameras makes avoidance increasingly difficult.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://deflock.me/|title=Find Nearby ALPRs|work=DeFlock|access-date=2025-08-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250728224453/https://deflock.me/|archive-date=2025-07-28|url-status=live}}</ref> The system uses AI to create ''"Vehicle Fingerprints"'' that identify vehicles by characteristics beyond license plates, including make, model, color, window stickers, & roof racks.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/surveillance-company-flock-now-using-ai-to-report-us-to-police-if-it-thinks-our-movement-patterns-are-suspicious|title=Surveillance Company Flock Now Using AI to Report Us to Police if it Thinks Our Movement Patterns Are "Suspicious"|work=American Civil Liberties Union|date=2024|access-date=2025-08-23}}</ref>

While Flock Safety claims their system doesn't violate Fourth Amendment rights because ''"license plates are not personal information,"''<ref name="Flock-PE">{{Cite web|url=https://www.flocksafety.com/privacy-ethics|title=Privacy & Ethics|work=Flock Safety|access-date=2025-08-23|archive-url=https://archive.ph/OP55p|archive-date=2025-08-23|url-status=live}}</ref> federal courts have challenged this interpretation. In February 2024, a federal judge ruled that Norfolk, Virginia's use of 172 Flock cameras likely violates the Fourth Amendment, finding the system creates a ''"detailed chronicle of a person's physical presence compiled every day."''<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ij.org/press-release/judge-rules-lawsuit-challenging-norfolks-use-of-flock-cameras-can-proceed/|title=Judge Rules Lawsuit Challenging Norfolk's Use of Flock Cameras Can Proceed|work=Institute for Justice|date=2024-02-01|access-date=2025-08-23}}</ref>

Data collected includes location history that can reveal sensitive information about medical visits, religious attendance, political activities, & personal associations. While Flock states data is deleted after 30 days, contracts grant them ''"perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free license"'' to use anonymized data indefinitely.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.flocksafety.com/terms-and-conditions|title=Terms and Conditions|work=Flock Safety|access-date=2025-08-23}}</ref> The system shares data across a network of over 4,800 law enforcement agencies nationally.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.404media.co/lawsuit-argues-warrantless-use-of-flock-surveillance-cameras-is-unconstitutional/|title=Lawsuit Argues Warrantless Use of Flock Surveillance Cameras Is Unconstitutional|work=404 Media|date=2024|access-date=2025-08-23}}</ref>   

===== "Anonymized data" =====

While Flock defines "Anonymized Data" as customer data ''"permanently stripped of identifying details and any potential personally identifiable information"'' , rendered so a person or entity ''"can no longer be identified directly or indirectly"'', this category still includes info like the vehicle make, model, color, location patterns, & other non–license-plate attributes.<ref>{{cite web |date=2025-07-22 |title=Terms and Conditions |url=https://www.flocksafety.com/legal/terms-and-conditions |access-date=2025-08-23 |website=Flock Safety}}</ref>

Privacy researchers caution that mobility datasets labeled as "anonymized" can still be re-identified. A 2013 MIT study found that just four spatio-temporal points uniquely identified 95% of individuals in an anonymized location dataset.<ref>{{cite journal |last=de Montjoye |first=Y.-A. |last2=Hidalgo |first2=C. A. |last3=Verleysen |first3=M. |last4=Blondel |first4=V. D. |year=2013 |title=Unique in the Crowd: The privacy bounds of human mobility |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/srep01376 |journal=Scientific Reports |volume=3 |pages=1376 |doi=10.1038/srep01376 |access-date=2025-08-23}}</ref> Civil liberties organizations such as the EFF & ACLU note that when detailed travel histories are retained, even without license plates, they're often able to be linked back to individuals when combined with other data sources.<ref>{{cite web |date=2025-06-01 |title=Flock Safety's Feature Updates Cannot Make Automated License Plate Readers Safe |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/06/flock-safetys-feature-updates-cannot-make-automated-license-plate-readers-safe |access-date=2025-08-23 |website=Electronic Frontier Foundation}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2024 |title=Surveillance Company Flock Now Using AI to Report Us to Police if it Thinks Our Movement Patterns Are "Suspicious" |url=https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/surveillance-company-flock-now-using-ai-to-report-us-to-police-if-it-thinks-our-movement-patterns-are-suspicious |access-date=2025-08-23 |website=American Civil Liberties Union}}</ref>

Flock operates on a subscription model charging municipalities and law enforcement agencies $2,500 per camera annually plus installation costs.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://campbellca.gov/FAQ.aspx?QID=279|title=How much does a Flock Safety camera cost?|work=City of Campbell|access-date=2025-08-23}}</ref> Private businesses including Home Depot & Lowe's also deploy cameras, sharing data with law enforcement.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.404media.co/home-depot-and-lowes-share-data-from-hundreds-of-ai-cameras-with-cops/|title=Home Depot and Lowe's Share Data From Hundreds of AI Cameras With Cops|first=Jason|last=Koebler|date=2025-08-06|work=404Media|access-date=2025-08-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250823135847/https://www.404media.co/home-depot-and-lowes-share-data-from-hundreds-of-ai-cameras-with-cops/|archive-date=2025-08-23|url-status=live}}</ref> Contracts include automatic renewal clauses & limit municipal oversight capabilities, with cities unable to audit system operations or control how other agencies use shared data.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/uploads/publications/flock_1.pdf|title=How to Pump the Brakes on Your Police Department's Use of Flock's Mass Surveillance License Plate Readers|work=ACLU|date=2024|access-date=2025-08-23}}</ref>

====== Cops stalking their ex: ======

In October 2022, Kechi, Kansas Police Lieutenant Victor Heiar was arrested & later pleaded guilty to computer crimes & stalking after using Flock cameras 228 times over four months to track his estranged wife's movements.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.kwch.com/2022/10/31/kechi-police-lieutenant-arrested-using-police-technology-stalk-wife/|title=Kechi police lieutenant arrested for using police technology to stalk wife|work=KWCH|date=2022-10-31|access-date=2025-08-23}}</ref>

In May 2025, Johnson County, Texas sheriff's deputies used Flock's network to track a woman suspected of self-managing an abortion. They conducting searches across multiple states including those where abortion is legal. The incident led Illinois officials to investigate and subsequently block 47+ out-of-state agencies from accessing Illinois ALPR data.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dallasnews.com/news/national/2025/06/12/illinois-officials-investigate-data-shared-with-texas-sheriff-seeking-woman-who-had-abortion/|title=Illinois officials investigate data shared with Texas sheriff seeking woman who had abortion|work=The Dallas Morning News|date=2025-06-12|access-date=2025-08-23}}</ref>

====== 0.2% effectiveness rate, low arrests: ======

In February 2024, Federal Judge Mark Davis ruled that Norfolk, Virginia's use of 172 Flock cameras likely violates the Fourth Amendment, comparing the case to Carpenter v. United States regarding warrantless location tracking. The judge found it "''difficult to drive anywhere of any distance without running into a camera."''<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://insideinvestigator.org/flock-camera-lawsuit-can-move-forward/|title=Flock camera lawsuit can move forward|work=Connecticut Inside Investigator|date=2024|access-date=2025-08-23}}</ref>

====== Held at gunpoint: ======

In Española, New Mexico, 21-year-old Jaclynn Gonzales and her 12-year-old sister were held at gunpoint & handcuffed after Flock's system mistook a "2" for a "7" on their license plate, falsely flagging their vehicle as stolen.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://redact.dev/blog/flock-safety-lpr-privacy-surveillance/|title=Flock Safety: Eroding Your Privacy & Keeping You Safe with Surveillance|work=Redact|date=2025|access-date=2025-08-23}}</ref>