Flock license plate readers: Difference between revisions
m →References: AT -> IA & GA |
|||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
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 |title=Privacy & Ethics |url=https://www.flocksafety.com/privacy-ethics |url-status=usurped |archive-url=https://archive.ph/OP55p |archive-date=23 Aug 2025 |access-date=23 Aug 2025 |work=Flock Safety}}</ref> federal courts have challenged this interpretation. In February 2024, a federal judge ruled that a lawsuit challenging Norfolk, Virginia's use of 172 Flock cameras could proceed, finding that plaintiffs had plausibly alleged the system creates a ''"detailed chronicle of a person's physical presence compiled every day."''<ref name="norfolk">{{Cite web |last=King |first=Dan |date=6 Feb 2024 |title=Judge Rules Lawsuit Challenging Norfolk's Use of Flock Cameras Can Proceed |url=https://ij.org/press-release/judge-rules-lawsuit-challenging-norfolks-use-of-flock-cameras-can-proceed/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250717001536/https://ij.org/press-release/judge-rules-lawsuit-challenging-norfolks-use-of-flock-cameras-can-proceed/ |archive-date=17 Jul 2025 |access-date=23 Aug 2025 |work=Institute for Justice}}</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 |title=Privacy & Ethics |url=https://www.flocksafety.com/privacy-ethics |url-status=usurped |archive-url=https://archive.ph/OP55p |archive-date=23 Aug 2025 |access-date=23 Aug 2025 |work=Flock Safety}}</ref> federal courts have challenged this interpretation. In February 2024, a federal judge ruled that a lawsuit challenging Norfolk, Virginia's use of 172 Flock cameras could proceed, finding that plaintiffs had plausibly alleged the system creates a ''"detailed chronicle of a person's physical presence compiled every day."''<ref name="norfolk">{{Cite web |last=King |first=Dan |date=6 Feb 2024 |title=Judge Rules Lawsuit Challenging Norfolk's Use of Flock Cameras Can Proceed |url=https://ij.org/press-release/judge-rules-lawsuit-challenging-norfolks-use-of-flock-cameras-can-proceed/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250717001536/https://ij.org/press-release/judge-rules-lawsuit-challenging-norfolks-use-of-flock-cameras-can-proceed/ |archive-date=17 Jul 2025 |access-date=23 Aug 2025 |work=Institute for Justice}}</ref> | ||
Data collected includes location history that can reveal sensitive information about medical visits, religious attendance, political activities, and 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 name=":1">{{Cite web |title=Terms and Conditions |url=https://www.flocksafety.com/terms-and-conditions |url-status=deviated |archive-url=https://archive | Data collected includes location history that can reveal sensitive information about medical visits, religious attendance, political activities, and 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 name=":1">{{Cite web |title=Terms and Conditions |url=https://www.flocksafety.com/terms-and-conditions |url-status=deviated |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/I7lWc |archive-date=20 May 2026 |access-date=23 Aug 2025 |work=Flock Safety}}</ref> The system shares data across a network of over 4,800 law enforcement agencies nationally.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Koebler |first=Jason |date=2024 |title=Lawsuit Argues Warrantless Use of Flock Surveillance Cameras Is Unconstitutional |url=https://www.404media.co/lawsuit-argues-warrantless-use-of-flock-surveillance-cameras-is-unconstitutional/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250826013458/https://www.404media.co/lawsuit-argues-warrantless-use-of-flock-surveillance-cameras-is-unconstitutional/ |archive-date=26 Aug 2025 |access-date=23 Aug 2025 |work=404 Media}}</ref> | ||
====="Anonymized Data"===== | ====="Anonymized Data"===== | ||
| Line 188: | Line 188: | ||
The Mountain View Police Department became aware in early January in 2026 during a department-initiated audit that for a brief period in 2024 federal agencies accessed data from the first camera in operation in the city. | The Mountain View Police Department became aware in early January in 2026 during a department-initiated audit that for a brief period in 2024 federal agencies accessed data from the first camera in operation in the city. | ||
“During the prior federal administration, from August to November 2024, several federal law enforcement agencies accessed Mountain View’s Flock Safety ALPR system for one camera via a 'nationwide' search setting that was turned on by Flock Safety. This setting was enabled without MVPD’s permission or knowledge. The federal agencies that accessed the one camera’s data include Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives offices in Kentucky and Nashville, TN; Langley Air Force Base in Virginia; the U.S. GSA Office of Inspector General; Lake Mead National Recreation Area in Nevada; and an Ohio Air Force Base. Flock Safety did not retain records for that time period, which means the vendor cannot determine whether searches of Mountain View’s data resulted in license plate information being shared.”<ref>{{Cite web |date=2026-01-30 |title=City Statement {{!}} City News {{!}} Mountain View, CA |url=https://www.mountainview.gov/Home/Components/News/News/1203/284 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive. | “During the prior federal administration, from August to November 2024, several federal law enforcement agencies accessed Mountain View’s Flock Safety ALPR system for one camera via a 'nationwide' search setting that was turned on by Flock Safety. This setting was enabled without MVPD’s permission or knowledge. The federal agencies that accessed the one camera’s data include Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives offices in Kentucky and Nashville, TN; Langley Air Force Base in Virginia; the U.S. GSA Office of Inspector General; Lake Mead National Recreation Area in Nevada; and an Ohio Air Force Base. Flock Safety did not retain records for that time period, which means the vendor cannot determine whether searches of Mountain View’s data resulted in license plate information being shared.”<ref>{{Cite web |date=2026-01-30 |title=City Statement {{!}} City News {{!}} Mountain View, CA |url=https://www.mountainview.gov/Home/Components/News/News/1203/284 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260216084340/https://www.mountainview.gov/Home/Components/News/News/1203/284 |archive-date=16 Feb 2026 |access-date=2026-02-07 |website=mountainview.gov}}</ref> | ||
MVPD officers also uncovered that “statewide lookup” had been turned on for all the city’s cameras since the program began. This feature has been turned off by the department on January 5, 2026. The MVPD plans to present a review of the ALPR pilot program to the City Council. | MVPD officers also uncovered that “statewide lookup” had been turned on for all the city’s cameras since the program began. This feature has been turned off by the department on January 5, 2026. The MVPD plans to present a review of the ALPR pilot program to the City Council. | ||