Menu Close

Amazon told to stay put in court; Microsoft might escape BIPA case

There is greater clarity today regarding a key provision of the state of Illinois’ biometric privacy law, landmark legislation in the United States.

Two putative class actions, one involving Amazon and the other Microsoft, had sought to convince a judge that the companies had not “otherwise profit from” facial photos gathered online without getting plaintiffs’ permission. Only one of the companies likely is happy with the clearer legal interpretation.

Illinois’ Biometric Information Protection Act holds that people own their biometric identifiers and cannot be collected without express permission and without informing the owners of how their data will be managed. The law takes particular aim at entities that try to profit from what the law says is not their property.

It has been argued that vacuuming facial images online for use in making algorithmic products better, more profitable or generate more revenue is a BIPA violation.

A U.S. District judge in Seattle has rejected Amazon’s motion to dismiss (Vance et al v. Amazon, western district of Washington, case 2:20-cv-01084) its lawsuit, according to reporting by the news service Reuters.

Amazon has used biometric identifiers – or commercial innovations made possible by having them — it took from photo-sharing social site Flickr, the court ruled, because they were used in products it sells. In fact, the judge said, the identifiers were so intrinsic to Amazon products that “it is commercially disseminating the biometric data.”

Microsoft survived the challenge, though it is not yet done with Vance et al v. Microsoft, case 2:20-cv-01082, being heard in the same court, before the same judge.

The judge acknowledged the plaintiffs’ (also the same between the cases) allegation that Microsoft benefited from use of the identifiers. But Microsoft did not share collected data in its own products.

The plaintiff’s claim was dismissed but they have been allowed to return with an amended claim.

Both Microsoft and Amazon where granted summary judgment in October.

The Flickr images were originally collected by IBM.

Its Diversity in Faces dataset was intended to reduce demographic differentials or bias in biometric systems, as IBM fellow and manager of AI tech John Smith told Biometric Update at the time, but has arguably done more to advance the incomes of data privacy attorneys.

Microsoft has not been as comparatively fortunate so far in another BIPA case involving Uber.

Amazon’s BIPA strategies and travails can be monitored here. There is greater clarity today regarding a key provision of the state of Illinois’ biometric privacy law, landmark legislation in the United States.

Two putative class actions, one involving Amazon and the other Microsoft, had sought to convince a judge that the companies had not “otherwise profit from” facial photos gathered online without getting plaintiffs’ permission. Only one of the companies likely is happy with the clearer legal interpretation.

Illinois’ Biometric Information Protection Act holds that people own their biometric identifiers and cannot be collected without express permission and without informing the owners of how their data will be managed. The law takes particular aim at entities that try to profit from what the law says is not their property.

It has been argued that vacuuming facial images online for use in making algorithmic products better, more profitable or generate more revenue is a BIPA violation.

A U.S. District judge in Seattle has rejected Amazon’s motion to dismiss (Vance et al v. Amazon, western district of Washington, case 2:20-cv-01084) its lawsuit, according to reporting by the news service Reuters.

Amazon has used biometric identifiers – or commercial innovations made possible by having them — it took from photo-sharing social site Flickr, the court ruled, because they were used in products it sells. In fact, the judge said, the identifiers were so intrinsic to Amazon products that “it is commercially disseminating the biometric data.”

Microsoft survived the challenge, though it is not yet done with Vance et al v. Microsoft, case 2:20-cv-01082, being heard in the same court, before the same judge.

The judge acknowledged the plaintiffs’ (also the same between the cases) allegation that Microsoft benefited from use of the identifiers. But Microsoft did not share collected data in its own products.

The plaintiff’s claim was dismissed but they have been allowed to return with an amended claim.

Both Microsoft and Amazon where granted summary judgment in October.

The Flickr images were originally collected by IBM.

Its Diversity in Faces dataset was intended to reduce demographic differentials or bias in biometric systems, as IBM fellow and manager of AI tech John Smith told Biometric Update at the time, but has arguably done more to advance the incomes of data privacy attorneys.

Microsoft has not been as comparatively fortunate so far in another BIPA case involving Uber.

Amazon’s BIPA strategies and travails can be monitored here.  Read More  Biometric Update 

Generated by Feedzy

Disclaimer

Innov8 is owned and operated by Rolling Rock Ventures. The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Any information obtained from this website should be reviewed with appropriate parties if there is any concern about the details reported herein. Innov8 is not responsible for its contents, accuracies, and any inaccuracies. Nothing on this site should be construed as professional advice for any individual or situation. This website includes information and content from external sites that is attributed accordingly and is not the intellectual property of Innov8. All feeds ("RSS Feed") and/or their contents contain material which is derived in whole or in part from material supplied by third parties and is protected by national and international copyright and trademark laws. The Site processes all information automatically using automated software without any human intervention or screening. Therefore, the Site is not responsible for any (part) of this content. The copyright of the feeds', including pictures and graphics, and its content belongs to its author or publisher.  Views and statements expressed in the content do not necessarily reflect those of Innov8 or its staff. Care and due diligence has been taken to maintain the accuracy of the information provided on this website. However, neither Innov8 nor the owners, attorneys, management, editorial team or any writers or employees are responsible for its content, errors or any consequences arising from use of the information provided on this website. The Site may modify, suspend, or discontinue any aspect of the RSS Feed at any time, including, without limitation, the availability of any Site content.  The User agrees that all RSS Feeds and news articles are for personal use only and that the User may not resell, lease, license, assign, redistribute or otherwise transfer any portion of the RSS Feed without attribution to the Site and to its originating author. The Site does not represent or warrant that every action taken with regard to your account and related activities in connection with the RSS Feed, including, without limitation, the Site Content, will be lawful in any particular jurisdiction. It is incumbent upon the user to know the laws that pertain to you in your jurisdiction and act lawfully at all times when using the RSS Feed, including, without limitation, the Site Content.  

Close Bitnami banner
Bitnami