US Judge Rules Flock Search Was Mass Surveillance. Bernie Sanders Proposes 'Ban Flock Act' (msn.com) 55
Flock's cameras offer "indiscriminate mass surveillance," a U.S. federal judge wrote in a ruling Thursday, as does any system with "continuously updated" location histories for all the vehicles filmed by automated license plate-reading cameras.
The judge's ruling included italics for emphasis when describing "the question of why is it the government's business where everyone goes all the time?" Judge Hill: We might reasonably expect our friends and family to tell us something like: "Hey, I saw you out driving by the store last week." But we do not expect people we know — let alone strangers, and especially not law enforcement — to randomly approach us to say: "Hey, I have been following your car for the last 30 days, and here is a detailed log of every place your vehicle has been with supporting photographic evidence. I am also going to share this information with law enforcement throughout the country so they know your whereabouts, too...."
Cell phones also move in public places where people can see you in plain view. But it becomes constitutionally problematic when law enforcement can indiscriminately and passively catalog your whereabouts over an extended period of time and then use that information for any purpose whenever convenient... [I]t is also consequential that we are not just dealing with stationary cameras. The cameras on [police officer] Alaniz's vehicle itself feed information into these systems... It is also no longer difficult to imagine law enforcement using a fleet of drones hovering over an entire city so they don't miss the movement of a single vehicle.
Officer Alaniz had used Flock's travel history for a car when deciding to pull over its driver, which eventually led to a vehicle search and charges of possessing drugs with intent to distribute. But the judge wrote that because this violated reasonable expectation of privacy, "all evidence obtained after Alaniz initiated the ALPR search must be suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree." The judge granted a motion to "suppress all evidence obtained as a result of these unconstitutional searches and seizures."
The Washington Post got this comment from a Flock spokesperson about the judge's ruling: "we expect it will be appealed and ultimately overturned." (Flock's spokesperson added that the ruling "does not set controlling precedent and does not affect law enforcement agencies' continued use of these important public safety technologies.")
But meanwhile, on Friday U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders introduced the Ban Flock Act. The proposed bill bans federal agencies in America from using automated license plate reader systems "without explicit statutory authorization". The bill also lets certain federal agencies (including the Homeland Security Department) withhold grant money from State and local governments that use automatic license plate readers.
TechCrunch reports: Despite its title, the bill doesn't call out Flock in the text and covers any and all ALPR systems. The bill allows exceptions only for toll collection and for uses that Congress approves in future legislation, which would have to limit data retention to no longer than 48 hours.... Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) are co-sponsors.
The judge's ruling included italics for emphasis when describing "the question of why is it the government's business where everyone goes all the time?" Judge Hill: We might reasonably expect our friends and family to tell us something like: "Hey, I saw you out driving by the store last week." But we do not expect people we know — let alone strangers, and especially not law enforcement — to randomly approach us to say: "Hey, I have been following your car for the last 30 days, and here is a detailed log of every place your vehicle has been with supporting photographic evidence. I am also going to share this information with law enforcement throughout the country so they know your whereabouts, too...."
Cell phones also move in public places where people can see you in plain view. But it becomes constitutionally problematic when law enforcement can indiscriminately and passively catalog your whereabouts over an extended period of time and then use that information for any purpose whenever convenient... [I]t is also consequential that we are not just dealing with stationary cameras. The cameras on [police officer] Alaniz's vehicle itself feed information into these systems... It is also no longer difficult to imagine law enforcement using a fleet of drones hovering over an entire city so they don't miss the movement of a single vehicle.
Officer Alaniz had used Flock's travel history for a car when deciding to pull over its driver, which eventually led to a vehicle search and charges of possessing drugs with intent to distribute. But the judge wrote that because this violated reasonable expectation of privacy, "all evidence obtained after Alaniz initiated the ALPR search must be suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree." The judge granted a motion to "suppress all evidence obtained as a result of these unconstitutional searches and seizures."
The Washington Post got this comment from a Flock spokesperson about the judge's ruling: "we expect it will be appealed and ultimately overturned." (Flock's spokesperson added that the ruling "does not set controlling precedent and does not affect law enforcement agencies' continued use of these important public safety technologies.")
But meanwhile, on Friday U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders introduced the Ban Flock Act. The proposed bill bans federal agencies in America from using automated license plate reader systems "without explicit statutory authorization". The bill also lets certain federal agencies (including the Homeland Security Department) withhold grant money from State and local governments that use automatic license plate readers.
TechCrunch reports: Despite its title, the bill doesn't call out Flock in the text and covers any and all ALPR systems. The bill allows exceptions only for toll collection and for uses that Congress approves in future legislation, which would have to limit data retention to no longer than 48 hours.... Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) are co-sponsors.
short sighted (Score:4)
"limit data retention to no longer than 48 hours." Yeah, right. Who is going to enforce THAT caveat, and how? Ban 'em all.
Re: (Score:3)
It will be morally binding.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. Which means nothing to people with no morals, integrity or decency. It is still surprising to me how much complete and utter scum we have in the human race.
Re: (Score:3)
I in no way mean to minimize the risk ALPRs and facial rec pose to our civil liberties and safety, and agree the problem is always the user - But the "users" in this case aren't going to suddenly start behaving. Hell, th
Re: (Score:2)
You're thinking of traffic cameras on stoplights, which also can see license plates.
If you're so worried about a camera seeing your license plate, you might be surprised to know how much data your cell phone shares (read the ToS and EULA completely).
Re: (Score:3)
If people are b****ing about Flock cameras, what about the cameras on most street signals.
Most of what you see are not cameras, they are sensors. The ones that are cameras don't generally record -they provide a live feed of traffic conditions to the monitoring station where traffic signal timing is adjusted to keep the flow going. In most jurisdictions the laws that allowed the installation of these cameras specifically banned recording or using them for any purpose other than live monitoring of traffic flow. There are also red-light violation cameras that take static shots of violators and i
Re: short sighted (Score:2)
Traffic violation cameras are also required by law to be disclosed in many areas. Where I live there are multiple signs letting you know they exist on roads they are used.
Re: short sighted (Score:1)
Cameras are not the problem. Everyone has cameras these days. I do not care if the local transportation department or highway department monitors the roads or has the ability to pull up a recording to determine the cause of a crash or some other event in the public space.
The network / database / AI detection of license plates / car color make model and features such as decals / facial features/ TPMS monitors / Bluetooth and WI-FI signals is the problem, and indefinite cataloguing of all of the above compoun
Re: (Score:2)
I use the traffic cameras frequently, you can't identify a license plate with them, and in most cities they're not on "most street signals" they're only at a few major intersections. You have no idea from that where somebody is actually going, even if they have a really distinctive vehicle. But 99% of vehicles are not identifiable from that anyway.
In my state they actually chose the cameras specifically to be low quality, to not identify vehicles, only to show traffic flow. There was public debate about it
It is still surprising to me how much ... (Score:2)
Perhaps you need to read Malthus instead of /.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I am aware of the facts. But I still find them hard to accept. The sheer level of maliciousness, dysfunction and lack of refinement is completely alien to me.
Re: (Score:2)
The street camera only holds 48 hours. But it offloads that on a daily basis, to whatever long term server is involved. Just like it does now.
You can't ban them all (Score:2, Insightful)
Go look at some midterm ads right now attacking the Democrats and every single one of them will be going after them for either being radical socialists or weak on crime or both.
The Republicans do the same thing every time, they make a law often one that's already there with a few extremely minor changes that does something like make it illegal to be a pedophile or something when it's obviously already is, than they add som
Re: (Score:2)
Easy. Jail time for the entire C suite as a penalty with random audits OSHA style.
Re: (Score:2)
If I slap a GPS tracker on every police vehicle, is that legal? If it's not, why is it legal in reverse? Do as I say, not as I do? lol...
Re: short sighted (Score:2)
If you organized a community who reported the real time position of the officer, that would be legal in most cases. Just like the ICE protesters did.
Not disagreeing with the point you were trying to make, just the specifics you used to try to make it.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn... (Score:2)
Bernie's correct on this one. But his participation is like a kiss of death to any hopes of fighting this mass surveillance.
We're so fucked.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, the US is one of the nations that have not had full-blown fascism yet and hence is only indirectly aware what a stellar bad idea it is. Maybe it is time for that experience. It would be nice if a nation could get that understanding without millions dead and many more brutalized and abused, but maybe that is not possible with the mix of humans we have on this dirtball.
Re: (Score:2)
the us has been fascist for a very long time
The US has been oligarchic and authoritarian all along, and has behaved towards some other nations much like a fascist nation would do, but in general has not subjected the general citizenry to full blown fascism. It's been horrible to everyone other than landed white males all along, though.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
America had a republic until Lincolns' War of Northern Aggression.
Oh look, it's the hipster maggot come along to tell us all how great slavery was.
Re: (Score:2)
America had a republic until Lincolns' War of Northern Aggression.
Oh look, it's the hipster maggot come along to tell us all how great slavery was.
Look bro, have you ever heard this saying:
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."
-- H.L. Mencken"
It was indeed, the War of Northern Aggression. The reasoning by the North was valid, the path taken was not. That should be fixed first. Centralized power is the ill that is killing the USA right now.
Sin
Re: Damn... (Score:2)
True. We should have hanged every last slave owner. Those would have been ends worth fighting for.
Re: (Score:1)
You must be one of those preaching hate. I hope you can eventually find some minimal core of human decency in yourself. At the moment, you clearly have none.
Re: Damn... (Score:2)
War of northern aggression⦠havenâ(TM)t heard that phrase since I moved out of SC about 15 years agoâ¦
Re: (Score:2)
What Bernie is trying to do is get attention to a movement because he's trying to do what worked in the '60s. This isn't a 1960s the fascists adapted to the tactics Bernie Sanders is using back in the mid-70s and he never figured
Legislation cannot limit future legislation (Score:2)
The bill allows exceptions only for toll collection and for uses that Congress approves in future legislation, which would have to limit data retention to no longer than 48 hours....
No, that's not how Congress works. This bill can be passed by a simple majority, and so can future legislation which alters or removes the limit.
Can we please stop proposing things that we can't legally do? That gives away the ethical and moral high ground against the other side proposing things it can't legally do...
Filibuster (Score:1, Flamebait)
So no we can't do things with a simple majority we need a supermajority because we need to put the brakes on a bunch of crazy fascists who are busy screwing us all
Re: (Score:2)
In 2021, 96% of Democratic Senators were in favor of abolishing the filibuster. Blocked only by Manchin and Sinema. But now, it's a damn good thing they did. Imagine what the last 2 years would have been like without it... Of course, we rewarded them for their foresight by forcing them out of office.
And what's something that the GOP Senate has not seriously considered doing to push their agenda? Abolishing the filibuster. Trump demanded it, and they've completely blown him off.
Also, please explain wha
Re: (Score:2)
Can we please stop proposing things that we can't legally do?
By "we" you mean, Bernie Sanders? He's been in the Senate since before his grandparents were born, and here's a list of all the bills he's gotten past:
That was it. That was the whole list.
Other exceptions? (Score:2)
Maybe an exception for pay parking garages as they've become huge users of ALPRs. It's far more efficient than barcoded slips of paper used to use to check in and out.
Without exceptions like this the lobbyists will kill the bill.
Re: (Score:1)
By all means... let's trade away some more of our privacy to get rid of that HUGE inconvenience of tickets and stickers at parking garages.
I mean... PAPER? How retro.
Re: (Score:1)
as usual (Score:2)
which eventually led to a vehicle search and charges of possessing drugs with intent to distribute
Yeah that's some old shit. Anyone look at the case enough to know what the evidence was? Was it just quantity or was it packaged?
Too late, Bernie (Score:2, Funny)
We've already seen those photos of you in your Audi R8.
we expect it will be appealed ... (Score:2)
court ordered warrant required (Score:2)
There should be strict limits on accessing this data. There will be more cameras and other surveillance tech in the future, not less.
I'm ok with it as long as you need a court order to access the information the same as you would for a physical search.
Re: (Score:2)
The plates belong to the state (Score:2)
Why shouldn't they be allowed to read them?
Duh (Score:2)
No funny here, but the Subject is the low-hanging fruit I was looking for.
What Flock does is mass surveillance of the most massive sort. However, I can imagine one way to provide legitimate probably cause. Link the cameras to speed detectors and only take pictures of license plates when speeding has actually been detected. But that approach would obviously harm shareholder value, so...
A better name (Score:2)