According to the article, Flock CEO apologizes for cases where surveillance technology was abused as company rolls out changes, the chief executive officer (CEO) of surveillance technology company Flock Safety apologized recently for instances where its data was misused by law enforcement officers and discussed changes the company is rolling out to its systems.

Following a media report that police officers were accused in 46 cases of improperly using access to Flock's license plate camera network, in some instances allegedly stalking women, Flock CEO Garrett Langley said he had listened to one woman's recent interview.

"I apologize," Langley said. "It kills me that she went through that."

Asked if he took enough responsibility soon enough when it came to the accusations of abuses, Langley said hindsight is "a brutal tool."

"Hindsight tends to be very clear," he said. "And I think, of course, we could have done more earlier, and we listen, and we learn, and we'll continue to move forward because until everyone has an equal level of safety in this country, we have work to do."

Langley still defended his company and the service it provides law enforcement agencies with its network of 120,000 cameras around the country that record license plate numbers and other details from vehicles that pass by.

"It gets to this issue that when you are given power, which many people are, particularly in law enforcement, you should have higher standards of accountability," Langley said. "And so, I don't think that Flock created police abuse. I think we're the first company to ever shine a light on it and build the tools to find it."

Among the changes the company announced , Flock is reducing the default period of time data will be retained from 30 days to seven days. However, if data is tied to an investigation that needs more time, it can be preserved in a setting it calls "Evidence Mode."

The company also said every search of its data will now require a case code to be entered beforehand. But that can be overridden in an emergency, like if a child goes missing.

Flock's customers can also limit which types of offenses outside agencies can search for in its system, like homicide, arson or assault, the company said.

By the end of the year, all of Flock's law enforcement customers will also have to turn on a tool that aims to flag abnormal search behavior and lock out people until the searches are reviewed by an administrator. The company says about a third of agencies have already turned on the tool, which rolled out earlier this year.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has criticized Flock, accusing the company of violating people's privacy rights. In a recent statement, the ACLU said the company's plan to reduce how long data is retained "may be a step in the right direction."

"Whether this is a real change or just another Flock PR move, however, will depend on how its 'Evidence Mode' operates," the ACLU said.

In a recent interview, Langley was asked if he had a message to any officer who was considering using Flock to follow someone who's not part of an investigation.

"You will get caught, plain and simple. If you try to use this tool illegally, you will get caught," he said. "And I hope that state regulators pass bills that make that a criminal offense. It should not just be a termination. It should be a criminal offense if you abuse your power."

Discussion Questions

  1. Describe the Flock Safety technology that is the subject of this article.

    Flock Safety technology is a public-safety and surveillance system that uses automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras and artificial intelligence (AI) to photograph passing vehicles and record information such as license-plate numbers, vehicle make, model, color, and distinctive features. 

    The cameras can send alerts to law enforcement when they detect vehicles associated with stolen cars, wanted persons, or missing-person investigations, and the resulting images can be searched by time, location, and vehicle characteristics to assist criminal investigations. 

  2. Describe the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). What is the ACLU’s involvement in this controversy?

    The ACLU is a nonprofit organization founded in 1920 that works to protect and defend individual rights and liberties guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and other laws. The organization engages in litigation, advocacy, public education, and legislative efforts involving issues such as freedom of speech, religious liberty, privacy, due process, equal protection, voting rights, and criminal justice. 

    The ACLU represents individuals and groups in court when it believes their constitutional rights have been violated and advocates for laws and policies that it believes will strengthen civil liberties and equal rights. The organization operates through a national office and affiliated organizations in states across the country.

    In this case, the ACLU’s involvement is based on the alleged misuse of the Flock Safety technology (by law enforcement) that results in a compromise to individual privacy rights. 

  3. After having read the article, in your reasoned opinion, what is the relative fault of Flock Safety in this controversy? The relative fault of law enforcement?

    This is an opinion question, so student responses may vary. 

    In your author’s opinion, in terms of relative fault, the weight here is on law enforcement, which has allegedly used the Flock Safety technology to invade the privacy rights of at least 46 individuals. In terms of Flock Safety’s involvement, its technology (used for the purposes for which it is intended) actually serves the public good by assisting law enforcement in locating stolen cars, as well as wanted and missing persons. The article also includes information regarding how Flock Safety has responded to the controversy by taking measures (e.g., technological “flags” for abnormal search behavior) to make it more difficult for law enforcement to use the technology for improper purposes.