Flock license plate readers: Difference between revisions
Archived many Flock Safety website links. Some links needed to use archive.today but that is still better than unusable Wayback Machine links. |
m →Evanston, IL: Removed unnecessary styling from section header. |
||
| Line 123: | Line 123: | ||
In Illinois, a Flock representative allegedly threatened a Department of Transportation official with police pressure when questioned about permit applications.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Uprise RI Staff |date=2024-10-23 |title=As Flock Surveillance Cameras Proliferate in Rhode Island, Lawsuit Challenges Their Legality |url=https://upriseri.com/as-flock-surveillance-cameras-proliferate-in-rhode-island-lawsuit-challenges-their-legality/ |url-status=live |access-date=2025-08-25 |website=UPRISE RI |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20241101064737/https://upriseri.com/as-flock-surveillance-cameras-proliferate-in-rhode-island-lawsuit-challenges-their-legality/ |archive-date=1 Nov 2024}}</ref> | In Illinois, a Flock representative allegedly threatened a Department of Transportation official with police pressure when questioned about permit applications.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Uprise RI Staff |date=2024-10-23 |title=As Flock Surveillance Cameras Proliferate in Rhode Island, Lawsuit Challenges Their Legality |url=https://upriseri.com/as-flock-surveillance-cameras-proliferate-in-rhode-island-lawsuit-challenges-their-legality/ |url-status=live |access-date=2025-08-25 |website=UPRISE RI |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20241101064737/https://upriseri.com/as-flock-surveillance-cameras-proliferate-in-rhode-island-lawsuit-challenges-their-legality/ |archive-date=1 Nov 2024}}</ref> | ||
===== | =====Evanston, IL===== | ||
Flock was ordered to remove 18 stationary cameras. The city put the contract with Flock on a 30-day termination notice on August 26. Flock Initially appeared to comply, removing 15 of the cameras by September 8. Later, Flock was caught reinstalling all of them by the following Tuesday without authorization from the city. The city of Evanston responded with a cease-and-desist order for Flock to remove the new and unauthorized camera equipment. Because Flock reinstalled the cameras without permission, Evanston was forced to cover the cameras with tape and bags to block them from potentially logging vehicle data.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Harrison |first=Alex |date=2025-09-25 |title=City covers Flock cameras while waiting for removal |url=https://evanstonroundtable.com/2025/09/25/city-covers-up-flock-cameras-while-waiting-for-removal/ |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260220002233/https://evanstonroundtable.com/2025/09/25/city-covers-up-flock-cameras-while-waiting-for-removal/ |archive-date=20 Feb 2026|access-date=2025-10-10 |website=Evanston Roundtable}}</ref> | Flock was ordered to remove 18 stationary cameras. The city put the contract with Flock on a 30-day termination notice on August 26. Flock Initially appeared to comply, removing 15 of the cameras by September 8. Later, Flock was caught reinstalling all of them by the following Tuesday without authorization from the city. The city of Evanston responded with a cease-and-desist order for Flock to remove the new and unauthorized camera equipment. Because Flock reinstalled the cameras without permission, Evanston was forced to cover the cameras with tape and bags to block them from potentially logging vehicle data.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Harrison |first=Alex |date=2025-09-25 |title=City covers Flock cameras while waiting for removal |url=https://evanstonroundtable.com/2025/09/25/city-covers-up-flock-cameras-while-waiting-for-removal/ |url-status=live |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260220002233/https://evanstonroundtable.com/2025/09/25/city-covers-up-flock-cameras-while-waiting-for-removal/ |archive-date=20 Feb 2026|access-date=2025-10-10 |website=Evanston Roundtable}}</ref> | ||
===City rejections and terminations=== | ===City rejections and terminations=== | ||