"This is a bad idea that Meta should abandon. If adopted and released to the public, it would violate the privacy rights of millions of people and cost the company billions of dollars in legal battles. This kind of face recognition feature would require the company to collect a faceprint from every person who steps into view of the camera-equipped glasses to find a match. Meta cannot possibly obtain consent from everyone-especially bystanders who are not Meta users."
"Meta's conclusion that it can avoid scrutiny by releasing a privacy invasive product during a time of political crisis is craven and morally bankrupt. It is also dead wrong. Now more than ever, people have seen the real-world risk of invasive technology. The public has recoiled at masked immigration agents roving cities with phones equipped with a face recognition app called Mobile Fortify . And Amazon Ring just experienced a huge backlash when people realized that a feature marketed for finding lost dogs could one day be repurposed for mass biometric surveillance."
Facial-recognition glasses would require collecting faceprints from every person who enters camera view, making consent for bystanders impossible. Dozens of state laws treat biometric information as sensitive and require strict protections and affirmative consent for collection and processing. Meta previously abandoned related technology and paid nearly $7 billion in settlements, and the company agreed in an FTC settlement to obtain consent before running face recognition on users. Public backlash to surveillance tools like Mobile Fortify and Amazon Ring demonstrates strong resistance to invasive biometric features. Civil liberties groups and plaintiffs' attorneys will continue to challenge such products.
Read at Electronic Frontier Foundation
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]