Leaked Document Suggests Possible Facial Recognition Ban In Europe
from the an-unlikely-outcome-but-we-can-hope dept
Bans of facial recognition tech are popping up across the United States. Facial recognition tech use by law enforcement is currently banned in the state of California and a few cities in Massachusetts have blocked local government agencies from deploying the tech.
Given the tech's relative inability to do its job, along with a host of other concerns including built-in biases that make it far more likely minorities will suffer the effects of false positives, lawmakers are finally putting the brakes on approving facial recognition use by government agencies.
A white paper leaked to Euractiv appears to indicate the biggest ban so far is under consideration in Europe -- one that would affect most of the continent.
The European Commission is considering measures to impose a temporary ban on facial recognition technologies used by both public and private actors, according to a draft white paper on Artificial Intelligence obtained by EURACTIV.
If implemented, the plans could throw current AI projects off course in some EU countries, including Germany’s wish to roll out automatic facial recognition at 134 railway stations and 14 airports. France also has plans to establish a legal framework permitting video surveillance systems to be embedded with facial recognition technologies.
Noting that the GDPR requires certain information disclosures by companies and agencies deploying the tech, the white paper [PDF] suggests going live with facial recognition tech might be unworkable, given that every person passing by an AI-enabled cam would have to consent to data collection. It suggests a moratorium might be the best solution until all the regulatory kinks can be worked out.
Building on these existing provisions, the future regulatory framework could go further and include a time-limited ban on the use of facial recognition technology in public spaces. This would mean that the use of facial recognition technology by private or public actors in public spaces would be prohibited for a definite period (e.g. 3-5 years) during which a sound methodology for assessing the impacts of this technology and possible risk management measures could be identified and developed.
That's just one of the five options being considered by the European Commission. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear to be one of its favorites. The paper says the most likely approach the Commission will take is a combination of options 3, 4, and 5. The ban is option 2.
But the GDPR definitely causes problems for the rollout of facial recognition tech in public places -- something the government agencies itching to deploy it don't appear to have considered seriously. It's pretty much unworkable unless the governments rolling these out are going to claim that being in a public place waives GDPR protections.
The desire to subject citizens to biometric collections may result in a rewrite of the GDPR or a blanket exception for collections in public places. This will only make a bad law worse.
But overall, the paper makes it clear the tech will be subject to tight regulation and much more oversight than we've seen deployed in the United States. Amendments to safety and liability laws are being considered that would allow tech companies to be held responsible for data breaches or misuse of collected biometric information. There would also be some sort of "trusted vendor" program put in place that would push companies to meet certain standards before they can be considered for government applications.
The ban is a long shot but it's still in the running. Given the number of changes that may need to be made to make facial recognition tech comply with existing European privacy laws, a temporary moratorium might be the best call to make. Clearly, the legal atmosphere in Europe isn't exactly welcoming for new data collection tech. But the narrative that more surveillance = safer countries will always have powerful proponents, which may override the privacy concerns of millions of European citizens and subject them to mass surveillance.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: eu, europe, facial recognition
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Brakes
___ "lawmakers are finally putting the brakes on approving facial recognition use by government agencies."
o
that's wishful thinking IMO.
A few scattered legal restrictions are not effective brakes.
Plus, government police and intelligence agencies are notorious for doing whatever they want ("Collect IT All") despite any existing legal restrictions.
"Lawmakers" (political rulers) also have a very poor track record of actually restraining their police/intell personnel.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ah great! Guess I bought that Guy Fawkes mask for nothing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
LED Lighting Fixtures
Great information. Thanks for sharing with us.
https://www.gladiatorlighting.com/fixtures.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Eh... surveillance does make people safer.... as long as the surveillance if focused on the people in (governmental) power, and as they execute their power.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yet Javid has said that it will definitely be used in London! I guess that's one thing that leaving the EU is not gonna be welcome!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This sort of legislation is precisely why there are joint Federal/State "fusion centers" scattered all over the country - technically, private security firms, which do the kind of investigation law enforcement are forbidden to do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Woman Stalked by Drone
https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jan/25/maine-woman-stalked-by-drone-police-unable-to-help/
A nother reason facial technology should be banned.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Helpful advancements in facial recognition and computer based object identification will only happen if researchers are allowed to continue developing it. Which also requires that the products are continually tested on real world subjects.
I support a ban blocking use in any government role as well as banning the governments from utilizing the results of the products from third parties. The tech is still not reliable enough to trust it with people's lives.
However we still should be able to privately deploy and test as well as have regulations about its deployment so that the technology can mature.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PPC Company
IF YOU WANT TO GROW YOUR BUSINESS ONLINE WITH PPC VISIT MY WEBSITE FOR MORE INFORMATION.
https://www.kingofdigitalmarketing.com/blog/best-ppc-services-in-delhi.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
"which do the kind of investigation law enforcement are forbidden to do"
Because subject "investigations" are illegal?
The reason for those fusion centers is the same reason as always ... money.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
"Helpful advancements in facial recognition and computer based object identification will only happen if researchers are allowed to continue developing it"
I am unaware of any impediments to the development of facial recognition, are you? If so, what are they?
"Which also requires that the products are continually tested on real world subjects."
There is no need to test your doomsday device upon the unsuspecting public, you sound like one of those mad scientists in a late night monster movie.
The development of facial recognition will be continually hampered by the fact that their input(s) is uncontrolled, unknown and completely unpredictable. If there were some sort of standard background and lighting .... oh but that's too difficult, let's just fake it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I can see it now...
Political person pulled over by Cop, because of Facial reg, Fail/not fail..
Sir. We have ID'd you are a felon..Can you prove Who the hell you are??
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If it comes to pass it will be like GDPR and minimum wage laws - the government will exempt itself.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Woman Stalked by Drone
Not sure what this has to do with anything. An overhead shot is really not using Facial Tech as you can't see a person's face unless they look up. You just see a top of a persons head. Now you can follow a person if you think you know who it is. But you don't need Facial tech to do that.
You also have zero expectation of privacy in public. Anyone at any time can record you or take pictures of you if you are out in public. You are recording on Security cameras everywhere you go and more than likely have no idea of most of them. A drone is no different from a person holding a camera, or a camera attached to a building.
If y ou doesn't want to be on camera, hide inside your house with the blinds closed. That is the only way you will have privacy. I could be outside your house with a camera recording at your window. So long as I'm on the public sidewalk, I'm breaking no laws. Close your curtains!!! Now if I stepped onto your property, now we get into trespassing. On your property peeking into your window, and now we get into peeking tom laws, etc. Out of the sidewalk, Nope!!!
FaceID on the iPhone, that is in fact Facial Recognition. S.F. banned that, and then did an ops as people couldn't use their iPhones now after they passed that law. I think they fixed that, but I think they should have left it as is. Banning is is really allowing criminals to roam the streets. I think for S.F. it's mostly to protect ILLEGALS. Who cares about all the poop and Needles everywhere.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
then I get a new face, to look just like they are..
Run around with fake ID, and never get arrested.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Woman Stalked by Drone
What you are overlooking from a privacy point of view is if 100 different people record where you are at different times of the day, none know much about what you are doing. If one person or organization records where you are 1,000 time a day, they know a lot about what you are doing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]