\n<\/p>\n
The country needs to find a \u201ccompromise\u201d between privacy and safety, according to Flock Safety CEO Garrett Langley.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhen people talk about just one of these, privacy or safety, they\u2019re prioritizing the wrong thing, and what we have to prioritize as a country is compromise,\u201d Langley said during a recent interview with Fox News<\/a>. \u201cHow do we have our safety, and how do we balance privacy?\u201d<\/p>\n Langley\u2019s Fox News appearance was just the latest interview he\u2019s given as the company faces a growing public outcry around concerns that Flock\u2019s surveillance cameras, drones, and license plate recognition technology could be misused.<\/p>\n These concerns aren\u2019t just hypothetical. The Washington Post recently identified 46 cases<\/a> where police officers have been accused of using Flock technology for unauthorized purposes, including to stalk their wives, girlfriends, or exes.<\/p>\n After listening to an interview with one of the alleged victims, Langley told CBS News<\/a>, \u201cI apologize. It kills me that she went through that.\u201d At the same time, he insisted, \u201cI don\u2019t think that Flock created police abuse. I think we\u2019re the first company to ever shine a light on it and build the tools to find it.\u201d<\/p>\n Just as the data center backlash has become a potent issue on both the left and the right<\/a>, both Democratic and Republican politicians have begun to take aim at Flock<\/a>.<\/p>\n On the left, Michigan\u2019s Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed recently accused his opponent Mike Rogers<\/a> of supporting \u201cthis mass proliferation of Flock cameras, any and everywhere, watching your every move to collect information without you even noticing.\u201d And Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders posted<\/a>, \u201cSTOP AI MASS SURVEILLANCE. STOP FLOCK.\u201d<\/p>\n On the right, three House Republicans recently introduced a bill<\/a> that would prohibit the federal government from purchasing automated surveillance systems that use facial recognition, biometric IDs, or license plate recognition, \u201cincluding a Flock Safety camera.\u201d<\/p>\n Flock has already made some changes in response to the criticism, reducing the default data retention time from 30 days to seven days and requiring that a case code be entered before accessing data. But both of these changes can be overridden \u2014 for example, police can save data for a longer time period by using a setting called Evidence Mode.<\/p>\n In its response to Flock\u2019s announced changes<\/a>, the American CIvil Liberties Union said, \u201cWhile Flock has not shortened the default retention period to the ACLU\u2019s recommended 48 hours, its proposal 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 \u2018Evidence Mode\u2019 operates.\u201d<\/p>\n For his part, Langley has said that state regulators should \u201cpass bills that make [the illegal use of Flock data] a criminal offense.\u201d And during his Fox News interview, he pointed to the changes the company has already made, while also saying, \u201cToday, it is too often that in Flock and in other technologies, there\u2019s no regulation. There\u2019s no accountability, and we think that\u2019s wrong.\u201d<\/p>\n TechCrunch will also be asking Langley about these issues when he appears on-stage at our Disrupt conference in October<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission<\/a>. This doesn\u2019t affect our editorial independence.<\/em><\/p>\n