Face Recognition Principles are a Step Forward But Congress Needs to Act

Companies are eager to deploy face tracking for their own ends, but FRTs have the potential to significantly alter our day-to-day existence in the public square. Companies and retailers should provide much more detail about their biometric data practices, and as Congress and the White House begin to discuss the contours of a federal baseline privacy law, facial recognition technologies deserve special attention.

Read More

Endangering Student Privacy in the Name of School Safety

In the wake of tragedy, there is an understandable desire by policymakers to act with urgency. Unfortunately, this can lead to untested policy that may jeopardize the very people it is intended to protect. A recent example is Florida’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act. Policymakers and education practitioners should be mindful of the risk of amassing and integrating large amount of data without proving its effectiveness could pose to the wellbeing of children. Limited and appropriate data sharing can play a role in supporting school safety, but it should not come at the expense of the students it is intended to protect.  

Read More

Cy Pres Awards Are an Important Tool to Protect Privacy

CDT, EFF, and the NCL filed an amicus brief before the Supreme Court in a case called Frank v. Gaos. The case asks whether it’s appropriate to distribute damages to charitable organizations working to advance the relevant interests of the class rather than attempting to divide and distribute the funds among class members.

Read More

CDT Supports Open Platforms in Herrick v. Grindr

CDT joined EFF in filing an amicus brief in Herrick v. Grindr, which arose when Appellant Matthew Herrick’s former partner repeatedly used Grindr, a dating app, to impersonate and harass Herrick. If platforms like Grindr were held liable for harms caused by content like the posts by Herrick’s former partner, consequences for users could include platform review of all content users intend to post. Subsequently, platforms would be more likely to prevent publication of potentially controversial comments or criticism, and remove accounts whose content could draw objections—potentially far beyond the harassing content at issue in the case.

Read More