A couple of weeks ago, there were reports of a controversy in a UK town concerning a proposal for audio recording with surveillance camera video in taxis. Now, China Daily reports that video and audio recording is occurring in taxis in China:

SHANGHAI – Wide debate has arisen over the video cameras and sound recorders that have been installed in as many as 6,000 taxis in Nanjing, capital of Jiangsu province.

Critics say the devices infringe upon privacy.

But Xu Hong, director with the Nanjing passenger transportation management office, said they are in fact meant to protect the safety of drivers and the rights of passengers.

The cabs’ recorders will run 24 hours a day and their cameras will be able to take eight pictures a minute.

The sound recordings will be stored in a data collector inside the taxis while the images will be transferred using a global positioning system to the police and to transportation management authorities. If a taxi driver feels endangered, he can press an emergency button that will make the camera start recording uninterruptedly and then send a report to the police. [...] Read more »

During the Thanksgiving break, there were several stories about how businesses are tracking customers in order to advertise to them and the reactions to this surveillance. This first story shows how sometimes opt-out choices are almost useless — shoppers can opt out of being location-tracked by turning off their mobile phones, rendering themselves out of touch in case someone needs to contact them for everyday or emergency reasons. In order not to be tracked, a person has to turn off a device that she paid for and that is not supposed to be affiliated with a shopping mall’s tracking technology.

CNN: Malls track shoppers’ cell phones on Black Friday

Starting on Black Friday and running through New Year’s Day, two U.S. malls — Promenade Temecula in southern California and Short Pump Town Center in Richmond, Va. — will track guests’ movements by monitoring the signals from their cell phones.

While the data that’s collected is anonymous, it can follow shoppers’ paths from store to store.

The goal is for stores to answer questions like: How many Nordstrom shoppers also stop at Starbucks? How long do most customers linger in Victoria’s Secret? Are there unpopular spots in the mall that aren’t being visited?

While U.S. malls have long tracked how crowds move throughout their stores, this is the first time they’ve used cell phones.

But obtaining that information comes with privacy concerns. [...] Read more »

The Washington Post reports on the use of license-plate readers in the District of Columbia. I discussed the issue when Washington, D.C., began expanding the use of these license plate readers a few years ago. One of the biggest questions then remains: What happens to all the data on innocent individuals? We don’t know what the restrictions are on the collection and use of the data. The Post report shows that we still don’t know what happens to all of the data, but here’s how some of it is used. In one Virginia county, the license-plate scanning technology is being used for tax collection:

More than 250 cameras in the District and its suburbs scan license plates in real time, helping police pinpoint stolen cars and fleeing killers. But the program quietly has expanded beyond what anyone had imagined even a few years ago.

With virtually no public debate, police agencies have begun storing the information from the cameras, building databases that document the travels of millions of vehicles.

Nowhere is that more prevalent than in the District, which has more than one plate-reader per square mile, the highest concentration in the nation. Police in the Washington suburbs have dozens of them as well, and local agencies plan to add many more in coming months, creating a comprehensive dragnet that will include all the approaches into the District. [...] Read more »

The Oxford Times reports on controversy in a UK town concerning a proposal for audio recording with surveillance camera video in taxis:

ALL conversations will be recorded in Oxford’s taxis by controversial new CCTV cameras, which critics last night claimed broke privacy rules. The plan for the city’s 662 taxis was last night branded an “absolute invasion of privacy”.

But Oxford City Council said the video and audio scheme was vital to provide evidence of attacks on drivers and in cases where there were allegations of driver misconduct.

Recordings would not be accessed unless requested by the police or council licensing officers for a specific crime or licensing issue, it said. [...] Read more »

The New York Times reports on the increasing use of facial-recognition technology on the general public, such as in a bar. As identification technology becomes cheaper and more prevalent, it could easily unmask people and track their movements. Those who were previously part of the unnamed crowd could be singled out for identification. See this previous post for a discussion about the First Amendment right to free speech and how widespread identification technologies can affect that. More of my thoughts on facial recognition in this older GCN interview.

The Times reports:

SceneTap, a new app for smart phones, uses cameras with facial detection software to scout bar scenes. Without identifying specific bar patrons, it posts information like the average age of a crowd and the ratio of men to women, helping bar-hoppers decide where to go. More than 50 bars in Chicago participate.

As SceneTap suggests, techniques like facial detection, which perceives human faces but does not identify specific individuals, and facial recognition, which does identify individuals, are poised to become the next big thing for personalized marketing and smart phones. That is great news for companies that want to tailor services to customers, and not so great news for people who cherish their privacy. The spread of such technology — essentially, the democratization of surveillance — may herald the end of anonymity. Read more »

I’ve discussed before the increasing use of facial recognition technology in advertising, especially in “digital signage.” Most people have heard of the term connected with billboards or other screens that have cameras (and facial-recognition technology) to watch people watching ads in order to improve their marketing. The digital signs log data such as gender, approximate age and how long someone looks at an advertisement. This is supposed to help build a better billboard — one that is tailored specifically to the individual standing in front of it. However, the data-gathering and surveillance practices raise substantial privacy questions. (Disclosure: The Center for Democracy and Technology has released a set of privacy guidelines for digital signage, which I consulted on and contributed to, in the report “Building the Digital Out-Of-Home Privacy Infrastructure.”)

USA Today and the New York Times have detailed safety problems that can arise from these digital billboards. BBC News has reported on the use of digital billboards in the United Kingdom. The Wall Street Journal has reported on digital signage use in Japan. The Los Angeles Times reported on the expansion of these digital billboards and their use of facial-recognition biometric technology in casinos, Chicago-area bars and more.

Now, the Economist takes a look at the use of facial recognition technology in digital signs and how advertisers are gathering data on people beyond just what they’re looking at — the tech can read your mood and check your vital signs, as well:

[M]aking online ads that not only know you are looking at them but also respond to your emotions will soon be possible, thanks to the power of image-processing software and the ubiquity of tiny cameras in computers and mobile devices. Read more »