EFF: California: Stop Face Surveillance on Police Body Worn Cameras

California: Stop Face Surveillance on Police Body Worn Cameras

Communities called for police officers to wear cameras, with the hope that doing so would improve police accountability, not further mass surveillance. But today, we stand at a crossroads. Face recognition technology is now capable of being interfaced with body-worn cameras in real-time—a development that has grave implications for privacy, free speech, and racial justice.

Take Action

California: No Face Recognition on Body-Worn Cameras

That is why we have joined a coalition of civil rights and civil liberties organizations to support A.B. 1215, authored by California Assemblymember Phil Ting. This bill would prohibit the use of face recognition, or other forms of biometric technology, on a camera worn or carried by a police officer.

Ting’s bill, by targeting a particularly harmful application of face surveillance, is crucial not only to curbing mass surveillance, but also to facilitating better relationships between police officers and the communities they serve. As EFF activist Nathan Sheard told the California Assembly last month, using face recognition technology “in connection with police body cameras would force Californians to decide between actively avoiding interaction and cooperation with law enforcement, or having their images collected, analyzed, and stored as perpetual candidates for suspicion.”

mytubethumb play
%3Ciframe%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DjU_m47V-kYY%26amp%3Bfeature%3Dyoutu.be%26autoplay%3D1%22%20allow%3D%22autoplay%3B%20encrypted-media%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%20width%3D%22560%22%20height%3D%22315%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E
Privacy info. This embed will serve content from youtube.com

The Assembly passed the bill with a 45-17 vote on May 9, and is now before the Senate.

Bans on government use of face surveillance have gathered support and momentum across the country. San Francisco in May banned city use of face surveillance. This month, Oakland, Calif. and Somerville, Mass. have both taken crucial steps toward adopting similar bans, with both measures now headed for full city council votes. Massachusetts is also considering a statewide moratorium on government use of face surveillance.

Meanwhile, law enforcement face recognition has come under heavy criticism at the federal level by the House Oversight Committee and the Government Accountability Office.

A.B. 1215 reflects widespread concern over face surveillance. Please urge your lawmakers to support this bill. We should not transform a tool intended to improve police accountability into a mass biometric surveillance network.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EFF: No Digital Surveillance of Iranians at the U.S. Border—or Within the U.S.

No Digital Surveillance of Iranians at the U.S. Border—or Within the U.S. Only days into heightened tensions between the United States and Iran, media outlets have published disturbing reports of increased scrutiny of people of Iranian descent at U.S. borders, including in at least one case involving a traveler’s phone. EFF strongly opposes any targeting of people for digital surveillance based on their race, religion, or nationality, at our border and in our interior. And we remind all members of the public to practice surveillance self-defense. Disturbing Reports from the Border On January 5, media outlets reported that more than 60 people of Iranian descent, including U.S. citizens, were held at the border between Canada and Washington state for many hours and questioned about their perceived connections to Iran. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) denied that it detained or refused entry to Iranians based on their national origin, a claim contested by accounts f
Read more

EFF: Corporate Speech Police Are Not the Answer to Online Hate

Corporate Speech Police Are Not the Answer to Online Hate A coalition of civil rights and public interest groups issued recommendations today on policies they believe Internet intermediaries should adopt to try to address hate online. While there’s much of value in these recommendations, EFF does not and cannot support the full document. Because we deeply respect these organizations, the work they do, and the work we often do together; and because we think the discussion over how to support online expression—including ensuring that some voices aren’t drowned out by harassment or threats—is an important one, we want to explain our position. We agree that online speech is not always pretty—sometimes it’s extremely ugly and causes real world harm. The effects of this kind of speech are often disproportionately felt by communities for whom the Internet has also provided invaluable tools to organize, educate, and connect. Systemic discrimination does not disappear and can even be ampl
Read more

Living on the (IT) Edge: Schneider Electric at HPE Discover 2018

Image
We’re here at HPE Discover 2018 , proudly sponsoring the event and enjoying a jam-packed few days in Las Vegas. The data center industry has experienced tremendous disruption in the last decade. The fourth Industrial Revolution, with its IT/OT convergence, the proliferation of IoT, and insatiable demand for digital connectivity, is creating the opportunity to push the envelope of performance beyond the obvious and create new business value. And there’s no bigger opportunity right now than at the edge. At the same time, these new paradigms are also driving more complexity: companies today are trying to manage a combination of environments, from large centralized data centers on-premises or in the cloud, regional edge data centers, to local edge data centers. We have more data centers, intertwined across more locations, and with more data, than ever before. All of this adds up to promising opportunities on the horizon for our customers – but an equally daunting number of new challenges
Read more