Can't the government already do the same using images from identity cards, passports, etc.? Is the problem mainly because it's a private company doing it? I genuinely want to better understand this issue.
Yes, the problem is that a private company doing it against data privacy regulations in the EU; collecting personally identifiable information and biometrics is regulated through the GDPR, the article clearly states the issue:
> The Dutch agency said that building the database and insufficiently informing people whose images appear in the database amounted to serious breaches of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR.
If identification of dutch citizens are a part of the product for services rendered by Clearview AI, they should be punished severely for this. Same goes with any country, or person, who doesn't want to be a part of their scheme.
Since they don't operate directly in the EU, there is not much else they can do aside from collaborating with other countries DPAs to ban any EU company from integrating with them (per the article currently only companies in the Netherlands are banned).
Even the fine itself is a bit problematic because it looks like unenforceable as they don't operate in the EU thus not subject to EU law.
However if it were to be discovered that the user images where not only retrieved by scrapping publicly available information, but involved data brokerage or other forms of personal information selling all those involved throughout that chain could be fined.
I think one day we will look back on this era, and think it is crazy that so much crime was committed in public and caught on video, and yet the government would usually not be able to take any action. They wouldn't be able to figure out who it was, and they wouldn't be able to find the criminal.
One day all of these things will be taken for granted because we will capture more and more video of public spaces, and AI facial recognition will be more accurate than human facial recognition.
>[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 agency said that building the database and insufficiently informing people whose images appear in the database amounted to serious breaches of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR.
> "Facial recognition is a highly intrusive technology, that you cannot simply unleash on anyone in the world," DPA chairman Aleid Wolfsen said in a statement.
> "If there is a photo of you on the Internet — and doesn't that apply to all of us? — then you can end up in the database of Clearview and be tracked. This is not a doom scenario from a scary film. Nor is it something that could only be done in China," he said.
-----------------
If you're pulling data from European Citizens from all over the internet, I'd imagine that the EU does get a say (since it's literally data processing of EU citizen data). I'd also expect that the EU could just make one of the other upstream suppliers of Clearview data responsible for enforcement.
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 the US that covers the activity.
While some people might be upset because GDPR isn't a stick they can use to beat Clearview with, this legal framework is the same that allows you to post material critical of the Chinese government without facing financial penalties or extradition.
> 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
That’s cute. I wonder where all the faces are coming from.
The US and UK governments already claim international jurisdiction in some cases - I hope the EU starts doing to protect their citizens against this sort of thing.
If having a facial recognition system of your citizens is immoral, then maybe the Netherlands government shouldn't have one either? Are the facial recognition systems of the Netherlands auditable? How can anyone be certain that they aren't being abused and used for political persecution?
EU has pretty strong controls on government use of facial recognition (multiple police programs shut down etc) and strong whistle-blower protections to allow people to report them
I rarely root for EU’s heavy handed approach to tech regulation. But in this case, I am willing to pick up Pom-poms and cheer for them as loud as I am capable of
“Go eu go. Bankrupt those bastards and jail them all. Go eu go. Give it to them hard”
svl|1 year ago
The full PDF with the investigation results e.a. as sent to clearview: https://www.autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/en/system/files?fi...
fsndz|1 year ago
piva00|1 year ago
> The Dutch agency said that building the database and insufficiently informing people whose images appear in the database amounted to serious breaches of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR.
fsndz|1 year ago
ryanisnan|1 year ago
mhitza|1 year ago
Even the fine itself is a bit problematic because it looks like unenforceable as they don't operate in the EU thus not subject to EU law.
However if it were to be discovered that the user images where not only retrieved by scrapping publicly available information, but involved data brokerage or other forms of personal information selling all those involved throughout that chain could be fined.
lacker|1 year ago
One day all of these things will be taken for granted because we will capture more and more video of public spaces, and AI facial recognition will be more accurate than human facial recognition.
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
htrp|1 year ago
>[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 agency said that building the database and insufficiently informing people whose images appear in the database amounted to serious breaches of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR.
> "Facial recognition is a highly intrusive technology, that you cannot simply unleash on anyone in the world," DPA chairman Aleid Wolfsen said in a statement.
> "If there is a photo of you on the Internet — and doesn't that apply to all of us? — then you can end up in the database of Clearview and be tracked. This is not a doom scenario from a scary film. Nor is it something that could only be done in China," he said.
-----------------
If you're pulling data from European Citizens from all over the internet, I'd imagine that the EU does get a say (since it's literally data processing of EU citizen data). I'd also expect that the EU could just make one of the other upstream suppliers of Clearview data responsible for enforcement.
mike_d|1 year ago
To seek any sort of judgement or criminal charge against them the EU would need to find an applicable law in the US that covers the activity.
While some people might be upset because GDPR isn't a stick they can use to beat Clearview with, this legal framework is the same that allows you to post material critical of the Chinese government without facing financial penalties or extradition.
stickfigure|1 year ago
johnchristopher|1 year ago
stanleykm|1 year ago
That’s cute. I wonder where all the faces are coming from.
exe34|1 year ago
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
briandw|1 year ago
Anonbrit|1 year ago
sensanaty|1 year ago
dmitrygr|1 year ago
“Go eu go. Bankrupt those bastards and jail them all. Go eu go. Give it to them hard”
0cf8612b2e1e|1 year ago
The only negative that really jumps out to me are cookie consent banners, but those are more malicious compliance than the fault of the EU.