271–276 of 276 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You might reach out to the California AG. I suspect they are itching for this kind of thing right now.
Because life is weird, my kid played little league baseball against his. I might have to do that.
How did we get to allowing this in the USA? I remember the zeitgeist used to be to make fun of China's mass surveillance / social credit system, and ten years ago proposing to build something like this in the USA would be unthinkable. It's wild that we're just willingly sliding into the same system here too.
I think you have your history a bit mixed up. In 2013, Snowden exposed the PRISM program and nobody gave a rat's ass. It was the clear and booming signal that nobody really cares about privacy in the US, and a clear signal that fascist interests have an opportunity to expand. I think Flock would have done really well back then. There is a long, bloody road of futile fighting against the surveillance machine the US has become.
We love to elevate ourselves above China while engaging in many of the same behaviors (although our version of insidious mass surveillance is privatized, which magically makes it better).
All that to say, adjust your timeline by a decade or two and your statement is correct again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The data Flock holds is not owned by OP. If I as a photographer take a photograph of someone, the photo does not belong to that person—the photographer retains the IP and ownership rights. You have rights too, such as privacy/likeness rights, which allow you to restrict what the IP owner is allowed to do with the image that they own, but you do not own the data, and your rights give you a claim against the data owner…
That's not the case under GDPR, CCPA, HIPAA, or other privacy regimes which codify our right to decide who can store our personal data and what they can do with it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t care. I don’t care who owns the data. If I can’t easily get private information like my movements removed from a database like this, the legislation does not sufficiently protect me. It should absolutely be Flock’s responsibility to remove my data and we should absolutely require it by law. Full stop.
The problem with this is where do you draw the line? If I film you with my iPhone (e.g. you walk past in the background of my video), Apple should delete my video from my phone and iCloud account based only on your instructions? Apple hold the data in iCloud, Apple (or a phone network) may be leasing me the phone. That sounds pretty similar to the Flock situation. I guess the difference is that flock might be sharing…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
California has an entire statute regulating ALPR information, so we don't need to derive this axiomatically.
One generally has to follow all of the laws, so evaluating what the CCPA says here is relevant for evaluating CCPA compliance.
“United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that installing a Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking device on a vehicle and using the device to monitor the vehicle's movements constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Jones_(2012)
I am against Flock as a company. Are they "installing a Global Positioning (GPS) tracking device on a vehicle and using the device to monitor the vehicles movement"? No.