“When Australians use social media or professional networking sites, they don’t expect their facial images to be collected without their consent by a commercial entity to create biometric templates for completely unrelated identification purposes,” she said.
“These practices fall well short of Australians’ expectations for the protection of their personal information.”Ĭommissioner Falk found the privacy impacts of Clearview AI’s biometric system were not necessary, legitimate and proportionate, having regard to any public interest benefits. Individuals featured in the database may also be at risk of misidentification. “By its nature, this biometric identity information cannot be reissued or cancelled and may also be replicated and used for identity theft. “It carries significant risk of harm to individuals, including vulnerable groups such as children and victims of crime, whose images can be searched on Clearview AI’s database. “The covert collection of this kind of sensitive information is unreasonably intrusive and unfair,” Commissioner Falk said. The OAIC determination highlights the lack of transparency around Clearview AI’s collection practices, the monetisation of individuals’ data for a purpose entirely outside reasonable expectations, and the risk of adversity to people whose images are included in their database. It then links to where the photos appeared for identification purposes. The tool allows users to upload a photo of an individual’s face and find other facial images of that person collected from the internet. The determination orders Clearview AI to cease collecting facial images and biometric templates from individuals in Australia, and to destroy existing images and templates collected from Australia.Ĭlearview AI’s facial recognition tool includes a database of more than three billion images taken from social media platforms and other publicly available websites.
not taking reasonable steps to ensure that personal information it disclosed was accurate, having regard to the purpose of disclosure.not taking reasonable steps to notify individuals of the collection of personal information.
collecting personal information by unfair means.collecting Australians’ sensitive information without consent.The determination follows a joint investigation by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) and the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).Ĭommissioner Falk found that Clearview AI breached the Australian Privacy Act 1988 by: breached Australians’ privacy by scraping their biometric information from the web and disclosing it through a facial recognition tool.
#Clearview ai 30m serieshill new series#
‘Investors can see that it’s just part of doing business.”Ĭlearview added three C-level executives in May as it seeks to expand the customer base of its law enforcement facial recognition tool.ĪnyVision topped the series of recently-announced fund-raises by biometrics providers, picking up $235 million earlier this month.Australian Information Commissioner and Privacy Commissioner Angelene Falk has found that Clearview AI, Inc. “People forget about that once the company is a lot larger,” he says. Ton-That also told the Times that his company has had good news on the legal front, apparently referring to the rejection of a motion that it be blocked from operating in Illinois pending the outcome of one of the cases, and noted that companies like Airbnb, Uber and PayPal have had legal entanglements. The Times also points out that the company is facing a joint investigation in Britain and Australia and multiple class-action lawsuits, and was declared illegal in Canada earlier this year. The funding round included “institutional investors and private family offices,” Clearview CEO Hoan Ton-That told the Times, though they declined to be identified.
0 kommentar(er)
