The commercial use of facial recognition technology
for security, access, marketing and customer service is rapidly growing. Privacy advocates argue that widespread use
of the technology will allow businesses to identify and track almost anyone in
public without their consent or even knowledge.
Businesses argue that individuals should not expect complete privacy in
public and that some loss of privacy is outweighed by the benefits the
technology offers consumers and businesses.
Multiple privacy, government and industry organizations have listed best
practices regarding the commercial use of biometric technology, but the
recommendations often conflict and no consensus has been reached.
Should businesses be required to obtain a person’s
consent, express or implied, before using facial recognition technology?
Yes, I think that businesses should require a person's express consent before using facial recognition technology. Facial recognition technology has the potential to be able to obtain a lot of information on an individual. I think that a person should need to give permission before such information can be used for commercial purposes. Some people may care more about the benefits of using the technology than about their privacy, but which is more important should be the individual's decision. As far as security goes, I think that the use of facial recognition should be in the hands of the police, where it should be strictly regulated.
ReplyDeleteYes. I believe the concept of implicit consent gives the middle ground between the individual and business. Express consent would be a logistic nightmare for everyone involved, and just isn't feasible for public surveillance. For example, if we were walking downtown in Salt Lake, we wouldn't get a block before being in the lens of dozens of security cameras and stoplight cameras. I'm not sure how we could institute a form of express consent for the capture of our image at all times in a public space. Our continual surveillance only seems to be increasing in scope. So then I guess the question shifts to the use of our image. As to the use of facial recognition, I believe it is feasible and expected that express consent be required by commercial businesses. That only makes sense to me, if a business is providing a service to the consumer contingent on the use of facial recognition software, the consumer has the incentive to give consent, and all others don't need to opt in. Again, the use of facial recognition software by government and law enforcement agencies must require implicit consent, seeing as the benefits of its use apply to the society as a whole and the capture of information is at such a broad scale.
ReplyDeleteYes. To some extent, this is already the case. Many businesses with security cameras have signs posted notifying customers of that fact, e.g. "Smile you're on camera." I believe that the same system should carry over for facial recognition software. Even though we have come to expect security cameras in almost any store or public place, I believe that the public has a right to be notified of the existence of cameras and/or facial recognition software that is in use. This way, people can make informed decisions about whether they want to shop in a particular store, fully knowing the potential privacy concerns of doing so.
ReplyDeleteYes, definitely. Your face, used in conjunction with something else about you, can be used to find out other, potentially sensitive, information, such as your social security number. Therefore, people should be, at the very least, informed about the presence of surveillance and facial recognition technology in public places. In these types of places, this technology should be strictly regulated and therefore only used for security purposes.
ReplyDeleteYes, I think it is important to obtain someone's consent before using facial recognition. By using facial recognition, people can find out virtually anything about someone. I think in most public places, this consent can be implied because of security cameras. By posting a sign that says "Security cameras in use, facial recognition used as needed", everyone who walks into the store will know that they could have facial recognition used on them. Overall, I think it is very important to secure the privacy of citizens. In a world where privacy is diminishing, I think it is important to keep privacy as secure as possible.
ReplyDeleteYes, businesses shouldn't have the ability to 'track' their customers. The use of facial recognition for security purposes, such as when a customer is physically on their property is acceptable. However, facial recognition should not be used for marketing or customer service. Businesses provide a service but in most cases do not need to track their customers. Outside of security interests, facial recognition shouldn't be used in commercial environments without the consent of the person. Depending on the level of facial recognition (how much information is obtained) the consent would be express or implied. Express consent should be required if more than a name is acquired, or if the information is maintained for a longer period of time.
ReplyDeleteYes, businesses should obtain consent implied or expressed before using facial recognition technology. I believe though, that there is more to this than obtaining consent. The businesses who use such technology need to be audited. As we read in this week's readings, businesses must conduct PIA's, and publish a notice in SORN. If these measures are met, I support the idea that businesses can track their customers. Ultimately, if a person's image or likeness is being stored and used to track, that person should be aware of it; the person's consent concerns our inherent right to privacy (however obscure that definition is).
ReplyDeleteYes, I think that companies should obtain implied consent before using this technology. Like several others have posted, I think that the companies owe it to their customers to post a simple notification that they are using facial scanning. As long as they have that notice clearly visible and don't share the collected data with anyone else, I feel like companies are within their rights to use facial scanning.
ReplyDeleteFacial scans can be useful for the company's security purposes (e.g. if a customer shoplifts, the cameras will recognize him/her next time he/she comes in). Companies also can use the information from facial technology to improve their marketing. Just as some companies already use facial scanning to make ads applicable to the age/gender of the viewer, this data can help them assess their customers' interests and demographics.
I find the concept of facial scanning to be creepy, but I think that companies are within their rights to do so as long as long as customers are aware of it and the company keeps that information private. If their purpose for collecting data through facial scans is solely to benefit their company and not to exploit its customers, I don't find the practice to be particularly harmful.
Yes.
ReplyDeleteIf you’re going to be selling information about individuals, I think you need consent from those individuals. I don’t think the number of cameras watching us is going to diminish in the future, and it’s unnerving to know that you could easily be tracked everywhere you go. It’s a bad sign when mass surveillance becomes more lucrative, and some effective decisions could dramatically alter how valuable facial recognition technology is. I think there should be legislation that requires consent before pictures of you can be included in a facial recognition database, as well as before your picture can be checked against facial recognition database.
Yes. I think businesses should have to require informed consent before using facial recognition. When someone's personal image is being used only for commercial gain and not some larger safety issue I think people should be able to opt in or out. It's one thing to collect data to keep the public safe in emergencies for companies to use information about someone without asking to make money, doesn't seem fair.
ReplyDeleteYes. I don't think that the argument that people shouldn't have an expectation of privacy in public is enough grounds to not require consent. Yes, being in public puts a person at risk of losing certain privacy rights, but if it can be avoided, why not take the necessary steps? Due to smartphones, people have the potential to capture images of others and share them immediately. This is something that has not been regulated (I'm not sure how that could be regulated or enforced), but it could potentially infringe upon a person's privacy rights in some cases. This has become an everyday occurrence. If a person goes in public, there is a chance someone may capture their image somehow. It's not really a problem anymore because it is so normal. But, what if this could have been stopped somehow before it became a normal occurrence? I know the cases are fairly different, but if there is potential to regulate businesses' use of facial recognition, why not implement those policies?
ReplyDeleteYes, companies should post notices that inform customers of their use of facial recognition software. Agreeing with Kate and Emily, customers should be able to know that they may be subjecting themselves to this, and the information collected by the business should be carefully protected. However, not all institutions should be allowed to use the software, only those that are public. Places like doctors offices and healthcare clinics should not be allowed to use these programs because of the HIPAA regulations.
ReplyDeleteYes, the issue with the argument that certain products outweigh the importance of privacy is that if that were true then there should be no problem getting consent from the user. If the product really is worth giving up some form of privacy that choice should be up to the individual not the business. Another issue with using facial recognition technology is that a lot of that information is traded around and if you are going to sell someone’s information you definitely need their consent for it to be legal. In cases where facial recognition makes the users the products for advertisers the users should be allowed to make an informed decision about the information they are giving up.
ReplyDeleteYes, I believe that businesses should be required to obtain consent from individuals to be able to use facial recognition. I do not believe that it needs to be explicit, but I do believe that consent needs to be given. This way people will know what privacy they are giving up in turn for the services they are given. I feel that people should know what they are actually giving when they receive a product.
ReplyDeleteNo, I don't think that business should be required to obtain consent to use facial recognition services. First, if you are on a public space like a sidewalk, people have the right to take your photo or video you as long as you do not use it in a commercial purpose. So as long as the business that is using the facial recognition is not selling my photo or my information to other businesses I am fine. Second, by stepping onto the premise of the business, you are already implying agreement to any rules that they may have on the premise. When I worked at the Real Salt Lake Stadium, people could be ejected from the stadium and the premises, and even if they were just in the plaza they could be ejected from the premises as well. So by stepping onto the premises of a business you are already giving your permission for surveillance by that business. Facial Recognition is just another tool to help businesses with their surveillance.
ReplyDeleteYes, I believe businesses should obtain explicit or implied consent from people before they use facial recognition software. I think that implied consent is enough for use of the technology for purposes of security--being notified that you are being watched by a camera that uses the tech and giving implied consent by continuing to be there. Using it for marketing purposes, however, I think businesses should be required to get explicit consent first.
ReplyDeleteYes. The question is how would this consent be obtained? I can think of a few scenarios where one approach is to entice people to voluntarily offer up consent in exchange for getting around add bombardment, or in exchange for a special discount of some kind. Whatever form it comes about in, I have no doubt that it will be something that is presented in a way to make it so that it's in the customer's best interest to consent and give up their face.
ReplyDeleteNo. Provided there are sufficient rules in place to control how organizations protect information and provided it is not used for "harmful" purposes. Obtaining express consent would be highly impractical, and would probably boil down to some "I agree" checkbox that everybody clicks. Nearly everybody is okay with being tracked by online advertisers - or at least, they have implied that they consent by not opting out - which is just as good at uniquely identifying a person. In summary, requiring consent would not be useful, so it would be better to assume that vast hoards of information are collected and handle that situation accordingly.
ReplyDelete