One U.S. state stands out in restricting corporate use of biometrics:
Illinois
Send a link to a friend
[September 16, 2021] By
Michael Berens
ST. LOUIS (Reuters) - When night fell, a
clerk at a bustling 24-hour MotoMart flipped a switch from behind the
counter.
Electromagnetic locks sealed the doorway. A window sign, now illuminated
in red, warned “facial recognition technology in use” and directed
customers to “look up at the camera.”
On this recent weeknight, a woman who wanted cigarettes was locked out.
Confused at first, she quickly realized that she needed to remove her
medical mask. After her unobstructed facial image was scanned into a
store computer, then screened against the company’s photo archives of
previous customers convicted of store-related crimes, the doors clicked
open.
Just a few miles away, across the Missouri state line in Illinois, such
screening is against the law under the toughest privacy laws in the
country. Private companies must obtain written consent before
stockpiling facial images or any biometric identifier – fingerprints,
palms, eyes and voice.
The contrast speaks to America’s digital privacy divide. On one side is
Illinois, along with two other states and several U.S. cities that
currently require some form of public disclosure or consent to biometric
screening. On the other is the rest of the country, including Missouri,
where private sector uses are by and large unrestricted.
Illinois’ law prohibits private sector companies and institutions from
collecting biometric data from unsuspecting citizens in the state or
online, no matter where the business is based. Data cannot be sold,
transferred or traded. Unlike any other state, citizens can sue for
alleged violations, which has sparked hundreds of David-and-Goliath
legal battles against some of the world’s most powerful companies.
A Reuters review of nearly 750 individual and class-action suits filed
in Illinois since 2015 found widespread evidence that private companies,
without disclosure or consent, have collected, tagged and categorized
biometric data gleaned from millions of unsuspecting Americans. Most
suits have been filed since 2019, when the Illinois Supreme Court, in a
bombshell decision, ruled plaintiffs did not have to show harm to
collect damages.
Privacy advocates warn that the swift, largely unchecked growth of such
tracking technologies has outpaced existing laws in most states, leaving
individuals vulnerable to identity theft, invasion of privacy and
discriminatory practices. Unlike a credit card or driver license, a
person’s biometric data is unique and cannot be changed or replaced.
The MotoMart system is designed to protect privacy with tamper-proof
software that prohibits owners from importing or exporting biometric
data involving any outside source, said Thomas Sawyer, a retired St.
Louis police detective. He co-founded Blue Line Technology, LLC, which
created the store’s face recognition system, with a group of former and
active law enforcement officers.
“We want people to know they are being watched,” he said. “That’s why we
have signs and a flashing light.”
Court records show that many companies use biometric systems to track
employee and student performance or monitor customers in order to
develop marketing and sales strategies. The suits detail how companies
or institutions allegedly used a fingerprint database of amusement park
visitors, including children, to look for signs of ticket fraud;
examined college students’ eye movements and typing cadence for signs of
cheating; and monitored employee interactions - whom they talked to and
for how long - and frequency of their bathroom breaks.
Cases are also pending against global web-based giants including
Amazon.com Inc, Apple Inc and Alphabet Inc's Google, as well as
brick-and-mortar corporations such as McDonald's Corp. The food chain is
accused of recording voices of some drive-thru customers to track
purchasing patterns, according to the suit. Complaints against the four
companies are pending. All four declined to comment.
In court papers, Amazon, Apple and Google denied any violation of
Illinois’ law, maintaining that privacy disclosures were provided to all
users. Also in court filings, McDonald’s disputed the accusations
against the company and asserted that voice data was used for training
purposes and “not to identify individual speakers.”
If a company is found to have violated Illinois law, citizens can
collect civil penalties up to $5,000 per violation compounded by the
number of people affected and days involved. No state regulatory agency
is involved in enforcement.
Some companies have opted for staggering settlements. Facebook settled
for $650 million last year following accusations that the social media
giant collected millions of facial photos without proper consent.
Earlier this year, Tik Tok’s China-based parent ByteDance settled for
$92 involving similar allegations. Neither company acknowledged
wrongdoing and neither responded to Reuters requests for comment.
At least half of pending suits involve regional or local companies. A
court verdict or settlement - even for violations that did not result in
measurable harm - could be financially crippling and lead to layoffs,
said Jack Lavin, chief executive officer and president of the
Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce.
“Illinois law has been weaponized,” he said. “It’s created a cottage
industry for suing companies.”
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Institute for Legal Reform labels
Illinois a “judicial hell hole.”
[to top of second column] |
Co-Founder Thomas Sawyer stands in front of his facial recognition
system from the company Blue Line Technology, at a convenience store
in St. Louis, Missouri, U.S., June 14, 2021. Picture taken June 14,
2021. REUTERS/Lawrence Bryant
FINGERPRINTING AT THE GROCERY STORE
It seemed like an idea out of science fiction: using a fingerprint scanner to
buy groceries. But in 2008, a California company swept into Illinois with just
such a futuristic online marketing pitch: “Imagine this. At checkout, you place
your finger on a small scanner. Instantly you see a list of your payment
accounts on a screen, checking account, credit or debit card … no cards, checks,
cash – or hassle.”
Soon after shoppers signed up, the company declared bankruptcy. Court filings
revealed that the company planned to liquidate inventory, including the
fingerprint database, to outside companies.
The Illinois chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union leapt to action and
sponsored legislation that became the Illinois Biometric Information and Privacy
Act, or BIPA. The California company’s fingerprint database was destroyed.
“We aren’t trying to ban technology,” said spokesman Ed Yohnka. “We want to put
protections in place to control, manage, inform and obtain consent.”
Only two other states currently enforce comprehensive biometric privacy laws.
Texas and Washington regulate compliance through a government agency, like an
attorney general, a Reuters review of state records show. However, both states'
laws are generally viewed as weaker than Illinois’ mandates by privacy
advocates; agencies often seek voluntary reform if violations are substantiated.
California will implement more comprehensive privacy protections in 2022, which
will limit how data is collected and create a new state regulatory agency
focused on consumer privacy laws.
Meanwhile, pro-business groups are fighting to modify Illinois’ law.
In January, the Chicago chamber of commerce sponsored legislation to soften
financial penalties and eliminate citizens’ right to sue, known in legal
parlance as a “private right to action.” The measure failed for lack of support.
‘WE COULD DO ALL KINDS OF STUFF WITH THIS!’
The Missouri MotoMart was the first store in the country to install the
surveillance lock-out device created by Blue Line. The firm represents one of
dozens of nascent companies in America that are struggling to gain prominence in
the facial recognition industry, focusing on small businesses with tight
budgets.
Blue Line launched in 2015 after Sawyer visited his friend, Marcos Silva, a
former military software programmer who now works as a St. Louis police
detective.
“Do you want to see something in my garage?” Sawyer recalled Silva asking.
Silva demonstrated a prototype for a face recognition program. Sawyer said he
blurted, “We could do all kinds of stuff with this!”
Today, Blue Line oversees about 50 systems, which cost about $10,000 each, in
convenience stores and gas stations in 12 states. A private Catholic high school
in suburban St. Louis also uses the Blue Line system to verify student
identities before they can enter the building.
But Blue Line confronts a shifting regulatory landscape. A Portland store
abandoned its system after the city council voted to prohibit private sector use
of face recognition beginning this year. The ban does not apply to government or
law enforcement.
Dozens of cities are now weighing new biometric restrictions. New York City
modeled much of its new privacy law this year after Illinois; businesses are
required to publicly and prominently disclose when biometric systems are used.
Cities should “press pause” on allowing biometric technologies until laws
require public transparency and corporate accountability, said Alan Butler,
executive director of Wash. D.C.-based Electronic Privacy Information Center.
Without legal safeguards, he said, real-time face recognition systems like the
one developed by Blue Line represent a “systemic threat to privacy.”
But Sawyer said he has proof Blue Line’s program works. He showed Reuters a
six-second video from July 2018 at an AM/PM convenience store in Yakima,
Washington.
At 1:20 a.m., two young men wearing ski masks dashed to the store’s front door.
Both appeared to clutch handguns under dark clothing. One man pulled the door
handle, locked by Blue Line’s system. Both men turned and ran.
Kush Hans, the owner of the store, said he installed the Blue Line system in
2017 after a masked robber fatally shot a 25-year-old clerk, a family relative.
Since face recognition has been installed, there have been no more robberies, he
said.
(Michael Berens reported from St. Louis and Chicago. Editing by Julie Marquis)
[© 2021 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2021 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |