Comment by bccdee
6 hours ago
> This idea that there's some kind of difference between me watching you in public and Flock watching you in public is bogus
Okay: Just how long would you permit someone to follow you around with a camera, recording everything you do?
The thing about a stranger watching you in public is that eventually you go somewhere else, and they can't watch you anymore. A surveillance organization like Flock, however, is waiting for you wherever you go. In this sense they're much more like a stalker following you around than a stranger who happens to see you.
This analogy bears out in practice: Cops have used Flock data to stalk their exes.¹
[1]: https://www.kwch.com/2022/10/31/kechi-police-lieutenant-arre...
> Okay: Just how long would you permit someone to follow you around with a camera, recording everything you do?
Probably not long. I might also make it clear I'm not a fan, but at the end of the day, they're generally within their rights to record me in public. Sucks, but not much I can do.
> The thing about a stranger watching you in public is that eventually you go somewhere else, and they can't watch you anymore. A surveillance organization like Flock, however, is waiting for you wherever you go. In this sense they're much more like a stalker following you around than a stranger who happens to see you.
I mean, I don't buy this argument, because a stranger can legally follow me to all the same places where Flock is present. I mean, surely if I get into a car and drive away, they can get into a car and follow me. So long as we're both in public roads, they're within their rights to do so?
Granted, if they keep it up long enough, I can probably file charges for stalking. Perhaps the same can be done against Flock? Hell, this would even be a situation where Flock would be useful: proving that someone was following me around all day, thus supporting my bid for a restraining order or something.
> This analogy bears out in practice: Cops have used Flock data to stalk their exes.¹
Indeed, and this is where oversight, strict rules around usage and retention, and effective penalties for violations are needed.
Banning Flock is not the only solution! I mean, I would be in favor of banning Flock specifically (because they've demonstrated a willingness to act in bad faith), but I would not support a ban of ALPRs entirely. They do provide benefits, and coupled with the right rules, can be a net benefit to society.
> Probably not long. I might also make it clear I'm not a fan, but at the end of the day, they're generally within their rights to record me in public. Sucks, but not much I can do.
You should not test this. If you record someone for hours or days in public, you may find yourself with a restraining order, a ticket for stalking (or assault), or a civil suit for invasion of privacy or IIED or something similar. This depends on the jurisdiction and the person you are recording, but what you are citing about not having an expectation of privacy is mostly meant with regards to point-in-time instances (one photo), not ongoing continuous surveillance.
Yes, the only distinction between any and all of these things and a legal recording is the length of time and the invasiveness of the collection of data. No, there is no bright line where you are definitely guilty or definitely safe (few things in law have one).