Man
Professional
- Messages
- 3,070
- Reaction score
- 606
- Points
- 113
A Navy veteran challenges the Flock system.
In Virginia, a lawsuit has been filed against the Flock camera network, which automatically reads car license plates and tracks movements. The lawsuit alleges that the system violates the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects against warrantless surveillance.
There are 172 such cameras in Norfolk, and according to the plaintiffs, it is impossible to avoid surveillance. Cameras record each passing car, and the data is stored in a database where routes can be analyzed using artificial intelligence. The lawsuit emphasizes that the system allows the police to monitor people without their knowledge and consent.
One of the plaintiffs, Navy veteran Lee Schmidt, said police could use Flock data to track his daily routes. For example, if Schmidt is driving straight through the intersection near the house, you can understand that he is going to his daughter's school, if he turns right, to the shooting range, if he turns left, to the store.
The second plaintiff, health worker Crystal Arrington, added that the system could reveal the identities of her patients. Since Arrington travels from house to house, the police can easily find out who she is going to.
Flock uses cameras in more than 5,000 cities in the United States. The devices work around the clock and automatically, without human intervention. The company claims that thanks to its technology, crime in the country will be defeated within 10 years. But earlier, the scientists that Flock involved in evaluating its work expressed doubts about the results of the study.
The Institute for Justice, which filed the lawsuit, did not choose Norfolk by chance. In 2022, the Court of Appeals ruled that the use of drones for surveillance in Baltimore for 12 hours a day was unconstitutional because they violated the Fourth Amendment. The lawsuit states that Flock cameras are even more dangerous than drones, as they register each car, creating a "digital fingerprint" of routes. In addition, the cameras were installed without the participation of the city council.
Norfolk police have confirmed that it is almost impossible to drive around the city and not get into the lens of the cameras. Recently, a court in Virginia has already banned the use of data from Flock cameras in a robbery case because the police obtained it without a warrant, violating the rights of the suspect. Flock and the Norfolk administration have not yet commented.
Recall that in 2023, at a meeting of the UK Parliamentary Committee on Science, Innovation and Technology, it was stated that the facial recognition system used by the London Underground during the coronation of the king may show racial bias at certain thresholds.
In addition, in 2023, a pregnant woman was arrested right outside her home in Detroit on charges of robbery and car theft. The arrest was the result of an erroneous match in the automatic facial recognition system.
Source
In Virginia, a lawsuit has been filed against the Flock camera network, which automatically reads car license plates and tracks movements. The lawsuit alleges that the system violates the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects against warrantless surveillance.
There are 172 such cameras in Norfolk, and according to the plaintiffs, it is impossible to avoid surveillance. Cameras record each passing car, and the data is stored in a database where routes can be analyzed using artificial intelligence. The lawsuit emphasizes that the system allows the police to monitor people without their knowledge and consent.
One of the plaintiffs, Navy veteran Lee Schmidt, said police could use Flock data to track his daily routes. For example, if Schmidt is driving straight through the intersection near the house, you can understand that he is going to his daughter's school, if he turns right, to the shooting range, if he turns left, to the store.
The second plaintiff, health worker Crystal Arrington, added that the system could reveal the identities of her patients. Since Arrington travels from house to house, the police can easily find out who she is going to.
Flock uses cameras in more than 5,000 cities in the United States. The devices work around the clock and automatically, without human intervention. The company claims that thanks to its technology, crime in the country will be defeated within 10 years. But earlier, the scientists that Flock involved in evaluating its work expressed doubts about the results of the study.
The Institute for Justice, which filed the lawsuit, did not choose Norfolk by chance. In 2022, the Court of Appeals ruled that the use of drones for surveillance in Baltimore for 12 hours a day was unconstitutional because they violated the Fourth Amendment. The lawsuit states that Flock cameras are even more dangerous than drones, as they register each car, creating a "digital fingerprint" of routes. In addition, the cameras were installed without the participation of the city council.
Norfolk police have confirmed that it is almost impossible to drive around the city and not get into the lens of the cameras. Recently, a court in Virginia has already banned the use of data from Flock cameras in a robbery case because the police obtained it without a warrant, violating the rights of the suspect. Flock and the Norfolk administration have not yet commented.
Recall that in 2023, at a meeting of the UK Parliamentary Committee on Science, Innovation and Technology, it was stated that the facial recognition system used by the London Underground during the coronation of the king may show racial bias at certain thresholds.
In addition, in 2023, a pregnant woman was arrested right outside her home in Detroit on charges of robbery and car theft. The arrest was the result of an erroneous match in the automatic facial recognition system.
Source
