Suing The Police Over Facial Recognition Tech | NBC News Now


NBC ESARAH HAARMAN TALKS TO ONE MAN WAGING A LEGAL BATTLE MAN WAGING A LEGAL BATTLE AGAINST THE USE OF SUCH AGAINST THE USE OF SUCH TECHNOLOGY IN THE UK. TECHNOLOGY IN THE UK.>>Reporter: IN 2017 AN OFFICE>>Reporter: IN 2017 AN OFFICE WORKER NAMED ED BRIDGES WAS WORKER NAMED ED BRIDGES WAS DOING SOME SHOPPING ON HIS LUNCH DOING SOME SHOPPING ON HIS LUNCH BREAK. BREAK. WHILE HE WAS OUT HIS FACE WAS WHILE HE WAS OUT HIS FACE WAS SCANNED BY POLICE CAMERAS AT SCANNED BY POLICE CAMERAS AT LEAST TWICE. LEAST TWICE. TO BE COLLEAGUES, ED WAS NOT ON TO BE COLLEAGUES, ED WAS NOT ON ANY WATCH LIST, WASN’T SUSPECT ANY WATCH LIST, WASN’T SUSPECT SUSPECTED OF ANY CRIME. SUSPECTED OF ANY CRIME. RATHER, HE WAS CAUGHT UP IN A RATHER, HE WAS CAUGHT UP IN A WIDE-SCALE POLICE AS USING OUGHT WIDE-SCALE POLICE AS USING OUGHT MADE THE FACIAL RECOGNITION. MADE THE FACIAL RECOGNITION. POLICE WERE USING IT ON POLICE WERE USING IT ON PEDESTRIANS THAT DAY, BUT ED PEDESTRIANS THAT DAY, BUT ED DIDN’T CONSENT TO THE FILM AND DIDN’T CONSENT TO THE FILM AND SAID IT’S A VIOLATION OF HIS SAID IT’S A VIOLATION OF HIS HUMAN RIGHTS AND IS TAKING THE HUMAN RIGHTS AND IS TAKING THE POLICE TO COURT. POLICE TO COURT. TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED. HAPPENED.>>THE FIRST TIME I CAME ACROSS>>THE FIRST TIME I CAME ACROSS THE OFFICIAL RECOGNITION THE OFFICIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY I POPPED OUT OF MY TECHNOLOGY I POPPED OUT OF MY OFFICE AT LUNCHTIME TO GO AND OFFICE AT LUNCHTIME TO GO AND TRY A SANDWICH AND PICK UP A FEW TRY A SANDWICH AND PICK UP A FEW THINGS JUST BEFORE CHRISTMAS AND THINGS JUST BEFORE CHRISTMAS AND ON THE MAIN PEDESTRIAN SHOPPING ON THE MAIN PEDESTRIAN SHOPPING CIRCUIT LIST WAS AS POLICE BAN, CIRCUIT LIST WAS AS POLICE BAN, POLICE GIVING OUT INFORMATION POLICE GIVING OUT INFORMATION AND SIGNAGE SO THE FIRST TIME I AND SIGNAGE SO THE FIRST TIME I REALIZED IT WAS FACIAL REALIZED IT WAS FACIAL RECOGNITION IS WHEN I WAS WITHIN RECOGNITION IS WHEN I WAS WITHIN 6 FEET OF IT. 6 FEET OF IT. BY THAT TIME MY IMAGE HAS BY THAT TIME MY IMAGE HAS ALREADY BEEN CAPTURED SEVERAL ALREADY BEEN CAPTURED SEVERAL TIMES AND I FELT AS LAW-ABIDING TIMES AND I FELT AS LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS GOING ABOUT MY BUSINESS CITIZENS GOING ABOUT MY BUSINESS THAT THAT WAS AN INVASION OF MY THAT THAT WAS AN INVASION OF MY PRIVACY IF YOU LIKE. PRIVACY IF YOU LIKE.>>Reporter: THERE’S CCTV IN>>Reporter: THERE’S CCTV IN BRITAIN EVERYWHERE. BRITAIN EVERYWHERE. IF YOU GO OUTSIDE YOU’RE MOST IF YOU GO OUTSIDE YOU’RE MOST CERTAINLY BEING RECORD RECORDED. CERTAINLY BEING RECORD RECORDED. HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT? HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT?>>IN SEVERAL KEY WAYS.>>IN SEVERAL KEY WAYS. UNLIKE CCTV THERE’S NO CLEAR OR UNLIKE CCTV THERE’S NO CLEAR OR LEGAL REGULATION AROUND LEGAL REGULATION AROUND AUTOMATIC FACIAL RECOGNITION AUTOMATIC FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY. TECHNOLOGY. IF I GO AND WATCH A FOOTBALL IF I GO AND WATCH A FOOTBALL MATCH OR IF I DO OPTIONS AND MATCH OR IF I DO OPTIONS AND POLICE ARE FILMING CROWDS, I POLICE ARE FILMING CROWDS, I HAVE RIGHTS. HAVE RIGHTS. AND THAT EQUIVALENT LEGISLATION AND THAT EQUIVALENT LEGISLATION DOES NOT PROVIDE THE FACIAL DOES NOT PROVIDE THE FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY. RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY.>>Reporter: SOME PEOPLE IN THE>>Reporter: SOME PEOPLE IN THE LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY WOULD LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY WOULD ARGUE THAT AT A TIME WHEN ARGUE THAT AT A TIME WHEN BUDGETS ARE BEING LOST AND THEY BUDGETS ARE BEING LOST AND THEY HAVE FEWER AND FEWER RESOURCES, HAVE FEWER AND FEWER RESOURCES, THIS IS A REAL VALUABLE TOOL THIS IS A REAL VALUABLE TOOL THAT HELPS CATCH BAD GUYS AND THAT HELPS CATCH BAD GUYS AND KEEP US ALL SAFE. KEEP US ALL SAFE. HOW WOULD YOU RESPOND TO THAT? HOW WOULD YOU RESPOND TO THAT?>>I DON’T QUIBBLE WITH THE FACT>>I DON’T QUIBBLE WITH THE FACT THAT POLICE HAVE DWINDLING THAT POLICE HAVE DWINDLING RESOURCES AND THAT THIS IS A RESOURCES AND THAT THIS IS A POTENTIAL USEFUL TOOL BUT IT POTENTIAL USEFUL TOOL BUT IT COMES BACK THAT WE DON’T LIVE IN COMES BACK THAT WE DON’T LIVE IN AN AUTHORITARIAN REGIME, WE LIVE AN AUTHORITARIAN REGIME, WE LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY AND THEREFORE WE IN A DEMOCRACY AND THEREFORE WE NEED THE SUPPORT AND CONFIDENCE NEED THE SUPPORT AND CONFIDENCE OF THE PUBLIC AND IN ORDER DO OF THE PUBLIC AND IN ORDER DO THAT THEY NEED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY NEED TO DEMONSTRATE THERE’S REVERSE MECHANISMS IN THERE’S REVERSE MECHANISMS IN PLACE, NOT JUST IN LAW BUT IN PLACE, NOT JUST IN LAW BUT IN TERMS OF BEST PRACTICE AND TERMS OF BEST PRACTICE AND GUIDANCE THAT THIS TECHNOLOGY IS GUIDANCE THAT THIS TECHNOLOGY IS BEING USED IN A WAY THAT DOESN’T BEING USED IN A WAY THAT DOESN’T INFRINGE ON THE RIGHTS OF THE INFRINGE ON THE RIGHTS OF THE MAJORITY. MAJORITY.>>Reporter: WE REACHED OUT TO>>Reporter: WE REACHED OUT TO THE SOUTH WALES POLICE THE SOUTH WALES POLICE DEPARTMENT, BUT THEY COULDN’T DEPARTMENT, BUT THEY COULDN’T TALK TO US WHILE THE CASE IS TALK TO US WHILE THE CASE IS ONGOING. ONGOING. THEY DID SEND US THIS STATEMENT THEY DID SEND US THIS STATEMENT THOUGH. THOUGH. THE FORCE HAS ALWAYS BEEN VERY THE FORCE HAS ALWAYS BEEN VERY COGNIZANT OF CONCERNS COGNIZANT OF CONCERNS SURROUNDING PRIVACY AND SURROUNDING PRIVACY AND UNDERSTAND THAT WE AS THE POLICE UNDERSTAND THAT WE AS THE POLICE MUST BE ACCOUNTABLE AND SUBJECT MUST BE ACCOUNTABLE AND SUBJECT TO THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF TO THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF SCRUTINY TO ENSURE THAT WE WORK SCRUTINY TO ENSURE THAT WE WORK WITHIN THE LAW. WITHIN THE LAW. WE SEEK TRANSPARENT AND LAWFUL WE SEEK TRANSPARENT AND LAWFUL USE OF LAWFUL AUTOMATED FACIAL USE OF LAWFUL AUTOMATED FACIAL RECOGNITION. RECOGNITION. IN A SEPARATE CASE A LONDON MAN IN A SEPARATE CASE A LONDON MAN SPOTTED ONE OF THESE FACIAL SPOTTED ONE OF THESE FACIAL RECOGNITION CAMERAS ON THE RECOGNITION CAMERAS ON THE STREET AND TRIED TO COVER HIS STREET AND TRIED TO COVER HIS FACE. FACE. POLICE STOPPED HIM AND FIND HIM POLICE STOPPED HIM AND FIND HIM $115 FOR DISORDERLY CONDUCT. $115 FOR DISORDERLY CONDUCT. ED BRIDGES’ CASE-INS WALES IS ED BRIDGES’ CASE-INS WALES IS COMPLICATED. COMPLICATED. THERE’S A LOT OF LEGAL MATTERS THERE’S A LOT OF LEGAL MATTERS TO CONSIDER AND A LOT OF TO CONSIDER AND A LOT OF TECHNOLOGY AS WELL, BUT WHEN THE TECHNOLOGY AS WELL, BUT WHEN THE VERDICT DOES COME DOWN AT SOME VERDICT DOES COME DOWN AT SOME POINT THIS SUMMER, IT WILL SET A POINT THIS SUMMER, IT WILL SET A PRECEDENT, NOT ONLY FOR THE UK PRECEDENT, NOT ONLY FOR THE UK BUT A MODEL FOR THE REST OF THE BUT A MODEL FOR THE REST OF THE WORLD LOOK AT AS WELL AND WORLD LOOK AT AS WELL AND CONSIDER HOW WE USE THIS

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Post navigation

9 thoughts on “Suing The Police Over Facial Recognition Tech | NBC News Now

  1. Stop wasting the court's time with such trivial nonsense. There's no expectation of privacy when in public. Get a life!

  2. It may be used for good now, however it’s only a matter of time before its used for something bad!! And after this whole abortion law, I do not trust the government!!

  3. It can only read Caucasians, as well. That is a fact that the U.S. Congress only recently addressed. Mainly, due to Border Patrol and ICE wanting to use these systems.

    There have been far too many U.S. Citizens falsely accused of crimes, even with DNA.

    Imagine adding migrants or illegal immigrants to the databases.

    Also, since masks can be made very realistic looking, plastic surgery is even more popular and cheaper than ever, and makeup does make your face look very differently from how it did naturally.
    Without those aesthetics and factors of ethnicity, this will be more of a legal burden than they want to readily admit.

    We all have approximately 5 other humans alive today who look almost identical to us. That means if one of your phycial twins is wanted by Interpol, or a local authority, you could be falsely detained and maybe prosecuted.
    All because of an erroneous marriage of Software and Hardware implemented to assist authories. The reality is that they actually have no idea how flawed the systems are. I doubt it will ever be used as a sole way to identify and capture criminals. While we all want a safer world, but we cannot police this way… And should not.

  4. No such thing as police only human evil holding us and our planet hostage. We must March n revolt drag all treasonous careered human evil out down to lowest hometown judge lawyers jailers procecuters mayors govenors landlords hospital administrator's and all others who profit from Mark of the BEASTonome monitary slavery community and reinstate the guillotine n separate them from their treasonous heads and treasonous careered lives n families holding us hostage before to late

  5. COPS BREAK FACE / LEGS OF JOURNALIST. JUDGE ORDERS: SHUT UP – INDEFINATELY! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY6U159Z6Ec

  6. If you are in public you have no privacy. If you dont wont to be recorded then stay inside i wish people would stop thrying to think hey know better then everyone ells.

  7. Privacy is gone. Its just called the united states but it no longer is. Our laws aren't much different than china or russia as far as freedom.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *