EFF's Position on Flock Camera Database Searches: 'Get a Warrant First' - and Police Use Should Be Restricted By Law
Some take their criticism even further. Reacting to Flock's changes, an EFF statement calls it "Too little, too late," while calling it Flock's admission that their technology needs reforms. But... To be clear, our position has long been that police, at a minimum, need to get a warrant, signed by a judge, in order to search for historic ALPR data regarding specific vehicles. For us, it's common…
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has criticized Flock's changes to their ALPR camera database, stating it is "too little, too late." The EFF maintains that police must obtain a warrant, signed by a judge, before searching historic ALPR data. They argue that police should not be able to retroactively monitor individuals' movements without legal authorization.
The EFF also opposes the idea that companies, like Flock, should determine the extent of privacy citizens are entitled to. They believe lawmakers must intervene and create legislation that limits the use of surveillance technology by law enforcement. The EFF emphasizes that the underlying issue is the surveillance business model, and merely relying on company-imposed reforms will not address the problem.
Written by urgent.news from Slashdot's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
