Flock Safety’s car-tracking cameras have been spreading across the United States like an invasive species, preying on public safety fears and gobbling up massive amounts of sensitive driver data. The technology not only tracks vehicles by their license plates, but also creates “fingerprints” of each vehicle, including the make, model, color and other distinguishing features.

Through crowdsourcing and open-source research, DeFlock.me aims to “shine a light on the widespread use of ALPR technology, raise awareness about the threats it poses to personal privacy and civil liberties, and empower the public to take action.” While EFF’s Atlas of Surveillance project has identified more than 1,700 agencies using ALPRs, DeFlock has mapped out more than 16,000 individual camera locations, more than a third of which are Flock Safety devices.

Flock Safety’s cease and desist later is just the latest in a long list of groups turning to bogus intellectual property claims to silence their critics.

  • Onno (VK6FLAB)@lemmy.radio
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 hours ago

    What are the legal implications of hosting this information in a different jurisdiction and are there places where this data would be legally protected?

      • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Thing is about trade marks… if the terms can be shown to be in common usage, the mark is struck down. Like Kleenex and Xerox.

        So let’s all start talking about privacy invading cameras as being flocking stupid.