logoalt Hacker News

thaumaturgyyesterday at 7:00 PM1 replyview on HN

Except that Flock very clearly benefits financially from having direct access to this data: owning (and in their own documentation, they very clearly do own it) a network of 80,000 surveillance devices across the country, and owning every single transit point for the data they collect, is what gets them to a $7.5 billion valuation from investors.

The fact of the matter is that Flock is playing two-step with the concept of "ownership" of data. They disclaim ownership as a way to leave local agencies holding the bag for liabilities, but they fight tenaciously to retain complete and unfettered access to that data.

(After organizing a community group that won Flock contract cancellations in multiple jurisdictions in Oregon, I went on to coauthor state legislation regulating ALPRs. I am very well familiar with all the dirty ball they play.)

Also, Flock's cameras collect more data than is provided to police agencies. Who owns that data, I wonder?


Replies

necovekyesterday at 7:07 PM

That makes them a data broker in my reading, and at least in California, Data Broker legislation should apply. CA Data Broker registry gives me access denied, but that could be because I am outside US.

show 1 reply