© Her Majesty the Queen of Canada for the Office of the Privacy Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada Protection against unintended use or disclosureĭraft privacy guidance on facial recognition for police agencies Special report to Parliament on the OPC’s investigation into the RCMP’s use of Clearview AI and draft joint guidance for law enforcement agencies considering the use of facial recognition technology Issue: Appropriate corrective action is required by RCMP to develop controls to prevent future similar contraventions Issue: The collection from Clearview was not directly related to an operating program or activity This decision follows the decision by the French authority on Clearview in December 2021, the dec ision by the Italian authority in March 2022 and the decision by the Greek authority in June 2022 : the se authorities prohibited the collection and processing of data by Clearview.Report of findings: Investigation into the RCMP’s collection of personal information from Clearview AI (involving facial recognition technology) The Austrian authority also ordered Clearview to appoint a representat ive in the EU, to enable EU citizens to exercise their rights more easily and for regulators to have a contact person in the EU. Complaints have been filed with data protection authorities in France, Austria, Italy, Greece and the United Kingdom. The images for this come from social media accounts and other online sources. The company claims to have "the largest known database of more than 10 billion facial images" and is aiming to reach 100 billion to make almost every person worldwide identifiable. An alliance of organizations, including noyb, Privacy International (PI), Hermes Center, and Homo Digitalis, filed a series of complaints against Clearview AI Inc. “ -Felix Mikolasch, data protection lawyer at noybĬomplaints in five countries. It seems that Clearview’s processing is only considered illegal if you complain to the data protection authority. The case of the complai nant is likely the same for everyone else in Austria. " It is unfo r tunate that no general ban was issued. Moreover, the Austrian DPA did not consider it necessary to order a general ban of Clearview, but mentioned that it might do so later on. Recently, the French data protection authority fined Clearview again over 20 Mio Euro. This comes as a surprise as the French, the Italian, the Greek and the UK data protection authority issued a fine. No general ban, no fine : Contrary to the other data protection authorities, the Austrian DPA did not issue a fine. Not only does Clearview have to delete all personal data of the complainant, but the data processing lacks a valid legal basis. and does not offer its services in Austria. Clearview AI uses its software to monitor the behavior of people in Austri a, even though the company is based in the U.S. The decision is clear: Collecting images of the complainant for a biometric search engine is illegal, as the GDPR applies to such scraping and selling of personal data from Europeans. The decision follows similar decisions in Italy, the UK, France and Greece, however no fine was issued.Ĭlearview must comply with GDPR. The US based company scrapes photos from websites to create a permanent searchable d atabase of biometric profiles. is no longer allowed to process biometric data of the complainant and must delete their existing data. The Austrian data protection authority has decided: Clearview AI, the company that sells facial recognition software to law enforcement agencies in the U.S. Clearview AI data use deemed illegal in Austria, however no fine issued
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |