Flock Safety’s car-tracking cameras have been spreading across the United States like an invasive species, preying on public safety fears and gobbling up massive amounts of sensitive driver data. The technology not only tracks vehicles by their license plates, but also creates “fingerprints” of each vehicle, including the make, model, color and other distinguishing features.

Through crowdsourcing and open-source research, DeFlock.me aims to “shine a light on the widespread use of ALPR technology, raise awareness about the threats it poses to personal privacy and civil liberties, and empower the public to take action.” While EFF’s Atlas of Surveillance project has identified more than 1,700 agencies using ALPRs, DeFlock has mapped out more than 16,000 individual camera locations, more than a third of which are Flock Safety devices.

Flock Safety’s cease and desist later is just the latest in a long list of groups turning to bogus intellectual property claims to silence their critics.

  • Onno (VK6FLAB)@lemmy.radio
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    What are the legal implications of hosting this information in a different jurisdiction and are there places where this data would be legally protected?

      • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Thing is about trade marks… if the terms can be shown to be in common usage, the mark is struck down. Like Kleenex and Xerox.

        So let’s all start talking about privacy invading cameras as being flocking stupid.

  • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m so fucking sick of this. We need to outlaw using third party companies to get around constitutional protections. Ending the third party doctrine is just another reason we desperately need a revolution.

    • warbond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Aggregating location data is very different from having a picture taken in public, wouldn’t you agree?

    • em2@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      There is a question on the constitutionality of automated surveillance technology, the type of data that is being collected, who has access to them, and how they are using it. Additionally, some other concerns I can think of off the top of my head are:

      • Are the taxpayers funding this?
      • Is my data being sold?
      • If so, who is profiting?
      • Where is supporting data showing this type of surveillance is needed?
      • What demographical areas are these cameras more prevalent in? Aka are there a subset of peoples being targeted by this type of surveillance?
      • What are the rules and regulations agencies need to follow with the data they capture with this tool?