Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Clearview AI faces $45.6M fine in the Netherlands for 'illegal database of faces

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 76 posts

Re: Clearview AI faces $45.6M fine in the Netherlands for 'illegal database of faces

#61

Post by hcfman »

mike_d wrote: post #36
htrp wrote: post #28

From the actual article: >[Clearview Chief Legal Officer] Mulcaire said in his statement that Clearview doesn't fall under EU data protection regulations. >"Clearview AI does not have a place of business in the Netherlands or the EU, it does not have any customers in the Netherlands or the EU, and does not undertake any activities that would otherwise mean it is subject to the GDPR," he said. ------------- >The Dutch…

Clearview is a perfect example of how to avoid EU-nexus. They don't have any corporate presence, employees, assets, or customers in the EU. They are even careful to only pull photos from US based servers. Because they only do facial matching on photos, they have no idea if someone is or is not an EU citizen. To seek any sort of judgement or criminal charge against them the EU would need to find an applicable law in t…

The Netherlands created an intelligence agency called the RIEC deliberately without a human representative so the whole organisation cannot be taken to court. And this organisation actively works against the rights of its citizens with impunity. The attorney general himself even said that their prosecutors can lie in court without being prosecuted for perjury. It’s a joke that this country pretends to be upset with clearview.

Re: Clearview AI faces $45.6M fine in the Netherlands for 'illegal database of faces

#62

Post by brainwad »

piva00 wrote: post #45
swyx wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Clearview AI does not have a place of business in the Netherlands or the EU, it does not have any customers in the Netherlands or the EU, and does not undertake any activities that would otherwise mean it is subject to the GDPR," he said. what limits do we place on countries randomly being able to make supranational claims like this? do you want every online business checking the passport of their customer? becaus…

> do you want every online business checking the passport of their customer? Is the business selling to a EU citizen? If so they have to deal with the rights that citizen has. If a company in some fictitious jurisdiction where fraud is not a crime defrauds an American citizen, should they not face American justice for it? It might be they don't have legal representation in the USA but that shouldn't stop an American…

If you run a company in a foreign country, then the laws of that country apply of course. Why should it be different just because they have scraped internet data containing images of Euroepeans? If that's legal in the home country of the business (as it would in, say, America) then its none of the EU's business.

Imagine the reverse, if China was fining European companies for not censoring CCP-offensive terms on the internet. Or America was fining them for dealing with US-blocklisted entities like Iran.

Re: Clearview AI faces $45.6M fine in the Netherlands for 'illegal database of faces

#63

Post by djhn »

hcfman wrote: post #61
mike_d wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearview is a perfect example of how to avoid EU-nexus. They don't have any corporate presence, employees, assets, or customers in the EU. They are even careful to only pull photos from US based servers. Because they only do facial matching on photos, they have no idea if someone is or is not an EU citizen. To seek any sort of judgement or criminal charge against them the EU would need to find an applicable law in t…

The Netherlands created an intelligence agency called the RIEC deliberately without a human representative so the whole organisation cannot be taken to court. And this organisation actively works against the rights of its citizens with impunity. The attorney general himself even said that their prosecutors can lie in court without being prosecuted for perjury. It’s a joke that this country pretends to be upset with c…

Could you point towards any sources on this? A few google searches turn up nothing and.

Re: Clearview AI faces $45.6M fine in the Netherlands for 'illegal database of faces

#64

Post by salawat »

arlort wrote: post #21
fsndz wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay I get it now, GDPR. But is it bad if it is used to catch criminals ? What's a potential misuse of that technology ? Maybe I watched too much of Person Of Internet...

> What's a potential misuse of that technology ? Off the top of my head it telling that someone is a criminal when they aren't and ruining their lives

Holocaust. Manhunts. Witch hunts. Having created the systems an unscrupulous psychopathic wannabe autocrat needs to cement their position of power.

Don't expect anyone here to understand that though.

Re: Clearview AI faces $45.6M fine in the Netherlands for 'illegal database of faces

#65

Post by piva00 »

brainwad wrote: post #62
piva00 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> do you want every online business checking the passport of their customer? Is the business selling to a EU citizen? If so they have to deal with the rights that citizen has. If a company in some fictitious jurisdiction where fraud is not a crime defrauds an American citizen, should they not face American justice for it? It might be they don't have legal representation in the USA but that shouldn't stop an American…

If you run a company in a foreign country, then the laws of that country apply of course. Why should it be different just because they have scraped internet data containing images of Euroepeans? If that's legal in the home country of the business (as it would in, say, America) then its none of the EU's business. Imagine the reverse, if China was fining European companies for not censoring CCP-offensive terms on the i…

> If that's legal in the home country of the business (as it would in, say, America) then its none of the EU's business.

The data pertain to EU's citizens, that is covered under the GDPR, if your business deal with private data from EU's citizens you are under the GDPR even if you don't operate in the EU (such as the case of Clearview). Of course, without an office/representation in the EU it's impossible for the EU to collect the fines and apply other punishments, still the business will be judged under the terms of the GDPR in the EU.

It's the business of the EU since the data is from EU's citizens. Like I mentioned before, if a business was defrauding people (i.e.: identity theft) in the USA while operating outside of the USA, the American justice system has all the prerogative to defend its citizens rights even if it wasn't possible to stop the operation, collect fines, etc. There would be an investigation, there would be a prosecution and eventual punishment. Depending on how egregious the rights violating behaviour was it could escalate into the international sphere.

It's the same case here, Clearview AI is processing private data from EU's citizens even if outside of the EU it is against EU laws.

> Or America was fining them for dealing with US-blocklisted entities like Iran.

The USA does punish companies outside of the USA for dealing with US-blocklisted entities, how the hell do you think sanctions work? Why do you think most of the world avoid dealing with Iran, North Korea, etc.?

Clearview has been targeted before by other DPAs in the EU [0][1][2][3][4].

[0] https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/national-news/2022/french-sa...

[1] https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/national-news/2022/facial-re...

[2] https://noyb.eu/sites/default/files/2021-01/545_2020_Anh%C3%...

[3] https://www.imy.se/globalassets/dokument/beslut/beslut-tills...

[4] https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/national-news/2023/decision-...

Re: Clearview AI faces $45.6M fine in the Netherlands for 'illegal database of faces

#66

Post by hcfman »

djhn wrote: post #63
hcfman wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Netherlands created an intelligence agency called the RIEC deliberately without a human representative so the whole organisation cannot be taken to court. And this organisation actively works against the rights of its citizens with impunity. The attorney general himself even said that their prosecutors can lie in court without being prosecuted for perjury. It’s a joke that this country pretends to be upset with c…

Could you point towards any sources on this? A few google searches turn up nothing and.

Sure. Not sure which part you were referring to, but I'll provide both.

Here for example is an article that refers to the fact that the RIEC is not headed by a person (natuurlijke persoon) and hence you can't take it to court:

https://www.nysingh.nl/blog/inzageverzoek-bij-riec-of-bij-ge...

But it's also helpful to use chatgpt here. Ask it if it is true that the RIEC as organisation cannot be taken to court because it's not headed by a natural person. I've asked that question before and it's answer in the affirmative. Note also, the RIEC has computer systems but asks it's partners, through which it does all it's work, not to put anything into their computers unless it's absolutely necessary for the job. It never is and it cannot be taken to court so it's untouchable.

As to the perjury part, first I'll answer in one way, I filed criminal charges of obstruction of justice against a prosecutor who was the former head of the RIEC who was pretending to prosecute his own asset for stalking merely so that he could make sure that the case did not succeed (because their manner of using this asset was absolutely illegal, they were facilitating illegal activity against people not involved in any criminal activity [collateral damage]). They dismissed the case, I appealed. The appeal went to the attorney general. The attorney general ignored and simply did not comment on any of the evidence and mere responded only to the perjury charge, stating that a prosecutor could not be charged with perjury (meineed), in the sense of artikel bla, bla (The bill for perjury). Suggestioning that the eeds oath (Oath not to lie) that they take when they become a prosecutor is useless.

So here is a link that states that anyone whose job includes a secrecy obligation is exempt from being prosecuted for perjury. They give an "example" of lawyer, but this was just mis-direction at the time, the wording is very broad and in my opinion so broad that it includes everyone in Dutch government.

https://www.judex.nl/rechtsgebied/strafrecht/columns/10-vrag...

And if not, then the attorney general told me in a letter, I just don't have that online.

Re: Clearview AI faces $45.6M fine in the Netherlands for 'illegal database of faces

#67

Post by hcfman »

djhn wrote: post #63
hcfman wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Netherlands created an intelligence agency called the RIEC deliberately without a human representative so the whole organisation cannot be taken to court. And this organisation actively works against the rights of its citizens with impunity. The attorney general himself even said that their prosecutors can lie in court without being prosecuted for perjury. It’s a joke that this country pretends to be upset with c…

Could you point towards any sources on this? A few google searches turn up nothing and.

The RIEC isn't just charged with finding evidence to prosecute people. It's also charge with doing "interventions", which are really broadly defined as actions carried out by a group (It's partners, police, council, tax department, mental heath organisation and more) to achieve a certain result. The means by which is left entirely to them.

There are some broad rules, like a cilian cannot be used for obsessive observation for more than a year, without a contract and they are not allowed to commit any crimes. But they harrassed me and my family for more than 10 years (Because I complained and thus in their eyes I deserved it). They don't give a shit about the laws, these are thus just for theater. Every single organisation I approached would not help and not journalist responded. No willingness to print the story.

Re: Clearview AI faces $45.6M fine in the Netherlands for 'illegal database of faces

#68

Post by hcfman »

djhn wrote: post #63
hcfman wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Netherlands created an intelligence agency called the RIEC deliberately without a human representative so the whole organisation cannot be taken to court. And this organisation actively works against the rights of its citizens with impunity. The attorney general himself even said that their prosecutors can lie in court without being prosecuted for perjury. It’s a joke that this country pretends to be upset with c…

Could you point towards any sources on this? A few google searches turn up nothing and.

The interventions are decided on by a role called "rechercheofficier van justitie" and a role call "hoofd team interventies". When my stalking case went to court, the former head of the RIEC was the prosecutor and the case was delayed, then the former head of team interventies turned up on the board of directors of the court, where influence from behind the scenes could be exerted to make the case fail.

In addition, the assistent to the prosecutor at the time had a role of intervention jurist. Or intervention legal advisor. So the whole lot of them all involved where working together to make sure that case of stalking against their illegal use of a civilian for harrassing someone not involved in criminal activity for more than 10 years would fail. In addition, the papers (The case had a number of news articles associated with it), printed lies from the prosecutor further painting my as an anti-social individual and the judge said in comments to the papers that this case has received enough press attention now. So shutup why don't you.

The civilian that I had filed police reports against for stalking, ending up having his house bought by the government at 200,000 euros loss (Profit to him).

I had more than 600 videos of evidence, the prosecutor could not name a single thing (In a phone call the next day) of anything I had ever done to the harrasser. He refused to submit the evidence and additional, large chunks of evidence "went unexplainably missing" as well.

I researched the hell out of why would a prosecutor deliberately make a case of stalking fail against someone that according to a jurist in the council had consumed more than 1,000,000 euros of money by the authorities over a 10 year period.

Re: Clearview AI faces $45.6M fine in the Netherlands for 'illegal database of faces

#69

Post by hcfman »

djhn wrote: post #63
hcfman wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Netherlands created an intelligence agency called the RIEC deliberately without a human representative so the whole organisation cannot be taken to court. And this organisation actively works against the rights of its citizens with impunity. The attorney general himself even said that their prosecutors can lie in court without being prosecuted for perjury. It’s a joke that this country pretends to be upset with c…

Could you point towards any sources on this? A few google searches turn up nothing and.

Oh, and the prosecutor who lied in court to make his case failed had been previously made lying in court in 2013. Then he didn't loose his job, he was promoted.

And the former head of team interventions, who was joinly responsible for the criminal intervention, was mentioned at the end of each episode of a six part documentary called "De Villamoord" as refusing to answer the documentary maker's questions. The documentary was about 9 innocent people sent to jail on fabricated evidence. So she's being responsible for obstruction of justice before, both of them have. But both of them were just promoted, not fired.

Before being the head of team interventions, she was previously the head of the organised crime unit in Arnheim, which is why her name was mentioned at the end of each episode. And it's why I then further investigated her background to discover those roles and the explanation was to why the case was delayed and how she was then in a position to further obstruct justice. I was interested, because we had had two meetings with her in my efforts to get the absurdly massive harrassment stopped.

It's quite clear that the huge escalation in harrassment that occurred before we started protesting at the town hall that resulted in the government buying the house of my harrasser was an attempt to make me trip up and do something illegal. A futile attempt because I'm simply just not that kind of person, I'm very law abiding.

Re: Clearview AI faces $45.6M fine in the Netherlands for 'illegal database of faces

#70

Post by hcfman »

djhn wrote: post #63
hcfman wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Netherlands created an intelligence agency called the RIEC deliberately without a human representative so the whole organisation cannot be taken to court. And this organisation actively works against the rights of its citizens with impunity. The attorney general himself even said that their prosecutors can lie in court without being prosecuted for perjury. It’s a joke that this country pretends to be upset with c…

Could you point towards any sources on this? A few google searches turn up nothing and.

I have a link to a description and many news articles relating to my battle to get the huge years long harrassment stopped. Including articles as to how I took the police to court and won, also in appeal (5 years later) and found evidence that shows that connection of my harrasser to prosecutor investigations and that the prosecutors office were protecting them.

The link is here:

https://hydracontrolfreak.com/geschiedenis/geschiedenis.htm

Note, I never updated that after the failed court case. Mostly because it make's me feel sick reading and confronting all this. 17 years of my life was taken up with it already. 17 years of my life was hijacked by an illegal and immoral and pointless "government intervention". And just because I had the audacity to complain about the harrassment that played out on the driveway I have to cross to get to my home. How dare I?

And I've not been able to hold a single person accountable. None of my official and on-time government complaints were handled. The council simply replied with "no comment" to all of my questions and refused to put this on paper.

The police wouldn't handle my complaint, likewise with the prosecutor's office. If the journalists don't do their jobs and publish articles about injustices, then there is no functional democracy.

Post reply on HN