Carding 4 Carders
Professional
- Messages
- 2,730
- Reaction score
- 1,467
- Points
- 113
£7.5 million is at stake, but Clearview AI isn't paying a penny.
A British tribunal yesterday ruled that the US-based selfie-collecting company Clearview AI is not required to pay a £7.5 million ($9 million) privacy penalty. The tribunal said that the Information Authority (ICO), which regulates data in the UK, does not have the right to fine ClearView, which collects images from open sources on the Internet to train its AI products.
The ICO imposed a fine on the company last May, alleging that the US company violated the UK's GDPR by failing to meet high standards for protecting biometric data, failing to have a legal basis for collecting it, and failing to provide procedures to stop the endless storage of data.
However, the tribunal found that, given the size of the UK and the extent of Internet and social media use, it can be concluded that images of UK residents are available in the ClearView database. However, it was decided that ClearView's data processing fell outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Regulation, and therefore the ICO had no right to issue notifications.
Clearview AI claimed that its service is an internet search engine designed exclusively for foreign (i.e. non-UK/EU) law enforcement and national security agencies.
Data protection lawyer James Castro-Edwards said: "Clearview only provided services to foreign law enforcement or national security agencies and their contractors. The UK GDPR stipulates that the actions of foreign states go beyond its scope."
In conclusion, the ICO representative stated: "The ICO will review today's decision and carefully consider the next steps."
A British tribunal yesterday ruled that the US-based selfie-collecting company Clearview AI is not required to pay a £7.5 million ($9 million) privacy penalty. The tribunal said that the Information Authority (ICO), which regulates data in the UK, does not have the right to fine ClearView, which collects images from open sources on the Internet to train its AI products.
The ICO imposed a fine on the company last May, alleging that the US company violated the UK's GDPR by failing to meet high standards for protecting biometric data, failing to have a legal basis for collecting it, and failing to provide procedures to stop the endless storage of data.
However, the tribunal found that, given the size of the UK and the extent of Internet and social media use, it can be concluded that images of UK residents are available in the ClearView database. However, it was decided that ClearView's data processing fell outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Regulation, and therefore the ICO had no right to issue notifications.
Clearview AI claimed that its service is an internet search engine designed exclusively for foreign (i.e. non-UK/EU) law enforcement and national security agencies.
Data protection lawyer James Castro-Edwards said: "Clearview only provided services to foreign law enforcement or national security agencies and their contractors. The UK GDPR stipulates that the actions of foreign states go beyond its scope."
In conclusion, the ICO representative stated: "The ICO will review today's decision and carefully consider the next steps."
