No Knowledge to Scrape (For Now) – Bredemarket

My Friday submit about Sedro-Woolley, Stanwood, and Flock Security is already old-fashioned.

Unique submit: Flock Security information is public file

That submit, “Privateness: What Occurs When You Knowledge Scrape FROM the Id Distributors?”, mentioned the case involving the 2 cities above and a non-public resident, Jose Rodriguez. The resident requested all Flock Security digicam output throughout specific brief time intervals. The cities semantically argued they didn’t have the info; Flock Security did. In the meantime the requested information was auto-deleted, technically making the request moot.

However not legally.

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiff’s movement for Declaratory Judgment that the Flock digicam information should not public information is DENIED.”

So the police try and preserve the information personal failed. Because it’s authorities materials, it’s public file and accessible by anybody.

Replace: the cameras are turned off

Now right here’s the half I missed in my unique submit, in response to CarScoops:

“[I]t seems that these photos are public information, in response to a decide’s current ruling. And nearly as quickly as the choice landed, native officers scrambled to close the cameras down….

“Attorneys for the cities mentioned they are going to assessment the choice earlier than figuring out whether or not to enchantment. For now, their Flock cameras aren’t coming again on-line.”

As a result of CarScoops didn’t hyperlink to the precise selections by the cities, I investigated additional.

Replace 2: the cameras had been turned off a very long time in the past

I sought different sources relating to Stanwood, Sedro-Woolley, and Flock Security, and found that CarScoops didn’t state the reality when it mentioned “nearly as quickly as the choice landed, native officers scrambled to close the cameras down.”

Seems Stanwood shut its cameras off in Could, awaiting the decide’s eventual ruling.

“Fourteen Flock cameras had been put in in Stanwood this February. Since Could, they’ve been turned off.

“In November 2024, the Stanwood Metropolis Council accepted a $92,000 contract with Flock Security to put in the cameras….

“The town is searching for a court docket judgment on whether or not Flock footage is public file or whether it is exempt from the state Public Data Act.”

Transferring on to Sedro-Woolley:

“The town of Sedro-Woolley is now not utilizing cameras that learn license plates whereas it seeks a court docket ruling on whether or not pictures recorded by the cameras are thought of public information.

“Police Chief Dan McIlraith mentioned the seven Flock Security cameras that went reside in Sedro-Woolley in March had been disabled in June.”

flip the cameras on once more

From my perspective, the one method I see the Flock Security cameras being turned on once more is that if the cities of Stanwood and Sedro-Woolley take the next two actions.

• First, the cities want to ascertain or beef up their license plate recognition insurance policies. Particularly, they should set the principles for methods to reply to public information requests. (And no, “stall for 30 days till the information are auto-deleted” doesn’t depend.)

• Second, and solely after a coverage is established, implement some type of redaction software program. One thing that protects the privateness of license plates, faces, and different personally figuring out info of people who find themselves NOT a part of a legal investigation.

And sure, such software program exists. Flock Security itself doesn’t provide it—apparently it by no means, um, envisioned {that a} metropolis can be pressured to launch all its information. However firms comparable to Veritone and CaseGuard do provide such software program providing computerized redaction.

In case you are a police company capturing video feeds, plan now.