#CLEARVIEW FACE PROFESSIONAL#

“The indiscriminate scraping of people’s facial images, only a fraction of whom would ever be connected with law enforcement investigations, may adversely impact the personal freedoms of all Australians who perceive themselves to be under surveillance.”Īustralia’s regulator said that between October 2019 and March 2020 Clearview AI provided trials of its tool to some local police forces - which conducted searches using facial images of individuals located in Australia.

#CLEARVIEW FACE PROFESSIONAL#

“When Australians use social media or professional networking sites, they don’t expect their facial images to be collected without their consent by a commercial entity to create biometric templates for completely unrelated identification purposes,” said Falk. The OAIC also found the privacy impacts of Clearview AI’s biometric system were “not necessary, legitimate and proportionate, having regard to any public interest benefits”. Individuals featured in the database may also be at risk of misidentification,” she also said, adding: “These practices fall well short of Australians’ expectations for the protection of their personal information.”

“By its nature, this biometric identity information cannot be reissued or cancelled and may also be replicated and used for identity theft. It carries significant risk of harm to individuals, including vulnerable groups such as children and victims of crime, whose images can be searched on Clearview AI’s database.” In public comments on the OAIC’s decision ( pdf) finding Clearview breached Australian law, Falk said: “The covert collection of this kind of sensitive information is unreasonably intrusive and unfair. Sweden’s data watchdog slaps police for unlawful use of Clearview AIīack on the other side of the world, the OAIC isn’t wasting any time acting against Clearview, nor mincing its words. In a separate statement today - which possibly reads slightly flustered - the ICO said it is “considering its next steps and any formal regulatory action that may be appropriate under the UK data protection laws”.Ī spokeswoman for the ICO declined to elaborate further - such as on how long it will be thinking about maybe doing something. regulator has yet to announce any conclusions. data protection agency, the Information Commission’s Office (IOC). The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) undertook a joint investigation into Clearview with the U.K. In what looks like a major win for privacy down under, the regulator has ordered Clearview to stop collecting facial biometrics and biometric templates from Australians and to destroy all existing images and templates that it holds.

not taking reasonable steps to implement practices, procedures and systems to ensure compliance with the Australian Privacy Principles.

not taking reasonable steps to ensure that personal information it disclosed was accurate, having regard to the purpose of disclosure.

not taking reasonable steps to notify individuals of the collection of personal information.collecting personal information by unfair means.collecting Australians’ sensitive information without consent.

In a statement today, Australia’s information commissioner and privacy commissioner, Angelene Falk, said Clearview AI’s facial recognition tool breached the country’s Privacy Act 1988 by: After Canada, now Australia has found that controversial facial recognition company, Clearview AI, broke national privacy laws when it covertly collected citizens’ facial biometrics and incorporated them into its AI-powered identity matching service - which it sells to law enforcement agencies and others.

Clearview face