Flock Safety is an American company that sells Automated License Plate Recognition technology (ALPR) to law enforcement agencies and neighborhood associations. Flock's systems allow matching and searching, raising both business interest in the form of significant venture funding as well as numerous privacy concerns.
 | |
| Industry | Technology, Surveillance |
|---|---|
| Founded | 2017 in United States |
| Founders | Garrett Langley, Matt Feury |
| Headquarters | Atlanta, Georgia |
| Products | Automated Licence Plate Readers |
| Website | flocksafety |
Flock's surveillance technology faces criticism for exacerbating issues of surveillance, particularly affecting minorities and leading to a chilling effect on civil liberties, as highlighted by privacy experts and organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU.
While Flock argues its technology aids in crime reduction and is designed not to identify individuals, there are debates about the efficacy of these claims and concerns about the comprehensive tracking of individuals' movements without suspicion of wrongdoing.
Critics argue for stringent controls and limitations on ALPR use to prevent disproportionate impacts on marginalized communities and to safeguard against the creation of expansive surveillance databases. Inaccuracies in ALPR technology have led to wrongful arrests and privacy invasions, raising significant concerns about the technology's reliability and the potential for misuse.
Technology edit
Flock's cameras read license plates and send instant alerts to law enforcement officers when the cameras identify license plates that match those on "hot lists" of cars that are stolen or otherwise of interest to the police. Private citizens, home owners associations, and businesses can also use Flock's cameras, with their own hot lists.[1]
Unlike other ALPR systems, Flock cameras allow searches based on the car's color and other visual features.[2][3] Flock Safety "allows law enforcement officers to query for various characteristics of a suspect vehicle, including make and model, color, paper plates, and attributes...like a specific bumper color," reported Flock investor Andreesen Horowitz.[4]
Business edit
Flock was founded in 2017.[5] By 2024 Flock's fixed cameras had been installed in over 4000 cities and 42 states across the US.[6][7][8] Flock has raised $380 million in venture funding, with a $3.5 billion valuation in 2022.[9]
Flock's investors tout its surveillance power:[10]
"What magnifies the power of Flock Safety even more is that the digital evidence can be pooled across different law enforcement agencies for a short period of time, making it more powerful as adoption scales within a community and across the U.S. more broadly...The power of Flock Safety is in its network. The more devices deployed, the more evidence there is to solve crimes."
Efficacy edit
Flock claims to substantially reduce crime rates in communities where its technology is deployed.
One highlight is the case of San Marino, California, where Flock Safety's technology was credited with an 80% reduction in residential burglaries in early 2021 compared to the same period in 2020. This statistic was used extensively in the company's marketing efforts. A closer examination revealed that overall, residential burglaries, and more serious offenses, in San Marino did not decrease in the years following Flock's introduction; burglaries slightly increased, and serious crimes remained nearly unchanged.[11]
Further investigation into Flock Safety's claims across other cities, such as Fort Worth, Dayton, and Lexington, showed a pattern of selective data use and potentially misleading marketing practices. Flock marketing overstated the effectiveness of its technology in reducing crime.[11]
Critics argue that Flock's claims about its impact on crime rates lack rigorous scientific backing and might not hold up under closer scrutiny. Despite these criticisms, some law enforcement officials praise the technology for its utility in solving cases. Skepticism remains among academics and some law enforcement officials regarding the actual efficacy of Flock's technology in reducing overall crime rates, suggesting a need for more transparent and comprehensive analysis.[11]
Lawbreaking edit
According to a Forbes 2024 report, hundreds of Flock cameras were not properly permitted, running into problems with Florida, Illinois, South Carolina, Texas, and Washington.[12][8]
From Jalopnik's reporting on the news: "In South Carolina, State Transportation Secretary Christy Hall told Forbes that since spring 2022, her staff has found more than 200 unpermitted Flock cameras during routine monitoring of public roads. In July 2023, the agency put a moratorium on new installations and ordered a safety and compliance review of all Flock cameras across the state... South Carolina Rep. Todd Rutherford had this to say: 'People don’t know what is happening with that data, who is accessing it, who is keeping it. All of that infringes on our personal freedom without our knowledge. It’s getting to the point where a company is willing to break the law to install these cameras.'”[8]
Privacy edit
There are privacy concerns about Flock's systems.[13][14][15][16] The Electronic Frontier Foundation argues that ALPRs like Flock create more problems than they solve.[17] There are concerns that Flock's system may cause harm, especially to minorities.[18]
Privacy expert Jodi Daniels warns Flock's technology "creates an environment where individuals may feel as though they are under constant surveillance. This can lead to a chilling effect on free speech and other civil liberties, as people might become hesitant to express themselves or participate in certain activities due to the fear of being recorded and possibly monitored by law enforcement."[19]
The American Civil Liberties Union released a report in March 2022 criticizing both Flock Safety's business model and its products.[20] In 2023, the ACLU acknowledged some uses of ALPRS could be OK, but emphasized the need for careful controls:[21]
We don't find every use of ALPRs objectionable. For example, we do not generally object to using them to check license plates against lists of stolen cars, for AMBER Alerts, or for toll collection, provided they are deployed and used fairly and subject to proper checks and balances, such as ensuring devices are not disproportionately deployed in low-income communities and communities of color, and that the "hot lists" they are run against are legitimate and up to date. But there's no reason the technology should be used to create comprehensive records of everybody's comings and goings — and that is precisely what ALPR databases like Flock's are doing. In our country, the government should not be tracking us unless it has individualized suspicion that we're engaged in wrongdoing.
Flock states its cameras and technology only captures data from vehicles, and the machine learning is specifically designed not to identify people. Flock has defended itself against "myths" about license plate readers.[22] Although Flock Safety claims their cameras reduce crime, opponents argue that there is no clear evidence for this.[23] In 2023, Atlanta police (Cobb County) credited a Flock license plate recognition system for helping them track down a gunman.[24]
Flock's surveillance model has also brought debates into towns between supporters and opponents of the technology.[25][26][27][28] Menlo Park, California opted out of a contract in 2023, bucking trends of nearby cities.[29]
A report by the University of Michigan found:[30][31]
"Recent studies examining the accuracy of ALPRs show that they often misread license plates, leading to disastrous real-world consequences, including violent arrests of innocent people. ALPR errors arise not only from shortcomings internal to their technology but from the hot lists they depend on to provide matches.
Even when ALPRs work as intended, the vast majority of images taken are not connected to any criminal activity. As most jurisdictions have no policies regarding retention limits, many agencies keep these scans on innocent people indefinitely. This can allow the government to maintain an overarching and potentially unconstitutional level of surveillance and can lead to abuse.
In some instances, officers have misused confidential databases 'to get information on romantic partners, business associates, neighbors, journalists and others for reasons that have nothing to do with daily police work.' Professional abuse includes targeting religious minorities and communities of color. Reproductive rights advocates are now raising alarms about the ways police and others could use ALPRs for the targeting of abortion clinics in the wake of the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade."
References edit
- ^ "Suburbs of Surveillance". Bloomberg.com. 2021-08-04. Retrieved 2023-12-10.
- ^ "Fort Worth, Texas, Deploys Solar-Powered License Plate Cameras". GovTech. 2021-08-23. Retrieved 2023-12-08.
- ^ "West Covina Police Install Network Of Flock Safety License Plate Reading Cameras In Strategic Locations - CBS Los Angeles". www.cbsnews.com. 2021-08-20. Retrieved 2023-12-08.
- ^ "Investing in Flock Safety". Andreessen Horowitz. Retrieved 2023-12-11.
- ^ Flock Safety. "Media Kit: Our Founding Story". Flock Safety. Retrieved 8 April 2022.
- ^ Cheng, Isabella (2022-02-16). "Flock Raises Another $150 Million, Valuation Now At $3.5 Billion". IPVM. Retrieved 2022-04-08.
- ^ "Investing in Flock Safety". Andreessen Horowitz. Retrieved 2023-12-11.
- ^ a b c "License Plate Surveillance Startup Broke The Law While Trying To Reduce Crime". Jalopnik. 2024-02-27. Retrieved 2024-02-27.
- ^ "Flock Safety IPO - Investing Pre-IPO". forgeglobal.com. Retrieved 2023-12-09.
- ^ "Investing in Flock Safety". Andreessen Horowitz. Retrieved 2023-12-11.
- ^ a b c Farivar, Cyrus. "Flock Installed AI Cameras In This Small City And Claimed Crime Went Down. It Went Up". Forbes. Retrieved 2024-02-29.
- ^ Brewster, Thomas. "This $4 Billion Car Surveillance Startup Says It Cuts Crime. But It Likely Broke The Law". Forbes. Retrieved 2024-02-27.
- ^ Joh, Elizabeth (2019-09-24). "The Rise of Networked Vigilante Surveillance". Slate. ISSN 1091-2339. Retrieved 2023-12-08.
- ^ Sheridan, Stacey (2022-04-05). "Oak Park to get eight license plate reading cameras". Oak Park. Retrieved 2022-04-08.
- ^ Harwell, Drew (2021-10-21). "License plate scanners were supposed to bring peace of mind. Instead they tore the neighborhood apart". The Washington Post.
- ^ "'Possibility of misuse a real one': ACLU shares privacy concerns for police Flock Safety cameras". WUWM 89.7 FM - Milwaukee's NPR. 2023-09-08. Retrieved 2023-12-08.
- ^ Guariglia, Jason Kelley and Matthew (2020-09-14). "Things to Know Before Your Neighborhood Installs an Automated License Plate Reader". Electronic Frontier Foundation. Retrieved 2022-04-08.
- ^ Sheridan, Stacey (2022-04-07). "Community Relations Commission strongly opposes Flock". Oak Park. Retrieved 2022-04-08.
- ^ "Flock Cameras and Privacy Concerns: Balancing Security and Civil Liberties". JustLuxe. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
- ^ Stanley, Jay (2022-03-03). "Fast-Growing Company Flock is Building a New AI-Driven Mass-Surveillance System". American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved 2022-04-08.
- ^ Stanley, Chad Marlow, Jay (2023-02-13). "How to Pump the Brakes on Your Police Department's Use of Flock's Mass Surveillance License Plate Readers | ACLU". American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved 2023-12-15.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "6 Myths About License Plate Readers and Security Systems". www.flocksafety.com. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
- ^ Matsakis, Louise (2021-10-24). "Can License Plate Readers Really Reduce Crime?". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 2022-04-08.
- ^ Murphy, Adam (2023-05-05). ""Camera network helped to find Midtown mass shooting suspect, police say"". Atlanta News First. Retrieved 8 May 2023.
- ^ Harwell, Drew (2021-10-23). "License plate scanners were supposed to bring peace of mind. Instead they tore the neighborhood apart". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
- ^ "Council Debating License Plate Readers". Good Times. 2023-12-06. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
- ^ Writer, Billy Jarrell Staff (2023-12-08). "Citizens express dissent at Flock Safety security system informational meeting". Lincoln News Now!. Retrieved 2023-12-11.
- ^ Bradley, Kian (2023-11-09). "Mercer Island Debates Surveillance Cameras - The Urbanist". www.theurbanist.org. Retrieved 2023-12-11.
- ^ Rebosio, Cameron. "Citing privacy concerns, Menlo Park says no to automated license plate readers". www.almanacnews.com. Retrieved 2023-12-08.
- ^ "Automated License Plate Readers widely used, subject to abuse | Science, Technology and Public Policy (STPP)". stpp.fordschool.umich.edu. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
- ^ "Automated License Plate Readers: Legal and Policy Evaluation | Science, Technology and Public Policy (STPP)". stpp.fordschool.umich.edu. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
External links edit
Media related to Flock Safety at Wikimedia Commons
