Facial recognition ban: People are tired of having their faces scanned

• Author:
• Author name

  Quantumrun Foresight
• November 1, 2022

Insight summary

Facial recognition (FR) is used in schools, public housing and transportation, and other areas to verify and monitor access. However, some of the most worrying applications of the technology are in law enforcement, with police departments using private databases of photos to identify criminal suspects. As a result, some local governments have banned facial recognition technology (FRT), and others are following suit.

Facial recognition bans context

According to the nonprofit American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), face surveillance is the most dangerous of all the technologies available to law enforcement. Even though it poses a risk to people of every race, the practice is particularly harmful to Black communities. Black scholars Joy Buolamwini, Deb Raji, and Timnit Gebru proved that algorithms could be racist in their research in 2018.

Their study found that algorithms misclassified Black women nearly 35 percent of the time while getting it right for white men almost all the time. Additionally, some US states’ police employ FRTs to identify individuals who appear in mugshot databases. However, this practice recycles past racial prejudice using 21st-century surveillance technology.

As a result of these worrying trends, there has been an increasing sentiment toward banning FR. In 2020, IBM, Amazon, and Microsoft announced they would discontinue or pause their sales of FRTs to the US police. Meta announced in 2021 that it would stop its FR feature on Facebook. The announcements followed the 2020 and 2021 anti-police brutality demonstrations in the US. These protests called attention to the surveillance tools Big Tech firms routinely sell to law enforcement. The statement also follows Congress’ focus on the potential for facial surveillance to be employed during protests, as evidenced by a letter sent by members of Congress to leaders of several federal agencies in 2020.

Disruptive impact

There are also increasing regulations against FRTs for commercial use. For example, King Country in Washington state, in the US, became the first county to ban private faceprint data gathering and use in 2020. Inspired by the county’s actions, 20 civil and human rights groups sent an open letter to federal, state, and local authorities asking them to prohibit both business and private usage of facial recognition.

The letter warned that large companies like Amazon, Apple, and Uber might utilize this technology to discriminate against minorities and vulnerable populations. Meanwhile, San Francisco had already prohibited FR usage by city authorities and police. On the East Coast, Maine enacted a harsh ban against FRTs, even restricting government use to just a few circumstances. In 2021, Baltimore, Maryland, released a local ordinance banning FRT from being employed by residents, businesses, and local government until December 2022.

Other territories have implemented laws regulating personal data collection, including those gathered by FRTs. The European Union’s (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) implemented data protection in Europe by providing several legal procedures and requirements for gathering and using sensitive and personal information, including FRT data processing. In 2019, the Data Protection Authority of Sweden administered its first GDPR fine following an FR pilot program to monitor attendance at a high school.

Meanwhile, in 2020, Canada’s Office of the Privacy Commissioner began an investigation into the Royal Canadian Mounted Police’s use of tech firm Clearview AI’s FRT. The Office announced a joint investigation with its counterparts in Alberta, British Columbia, and Quebec. As a result of these investigations, Clearview AI ceased offering all FR solutions in Canada.

Implications of facial recognition ban

Wider implications of FR bans may include: 

• More countries implementing FRT regulations to limit how companies collect and use this information beyond identity verification.
• Critics demanding their respective governments regulate or permanently ban FRT use.
• More federal agencies, including law enforcement and military organizations, continuing using FRT, despite community backlash.
• More Big Tech firms discontinuing the commercialization of their FRTs, opening the market for medium-sized, specialist FRT companies to fill market demand.
• Increased lawsuits and fines for organizations that attempt to use FRTs unethically or without consent.
• Enhanced consumer awareness and demand for transparency in data usage, leading to more informed choices and greater control over personal data.
• Businesses adapting by integrating alternative, less intrusive technologies for identity verification and security, impacting their operational models.
• Governments developing comprehensive digital ethics frameworks to guide the responsible use of emerging technologies, influencing global standards.

Questions to consider

• How might a facial recognition ban influence how people act in public? 
• What are the other ways that FRTs can be potentially misused?