Menu Close

Biometric data privacy cases expand beyond BIPA with new filing in Oregon

If it is a day ending in “y”, chances are that there is biometric privacy courtroom news to report.

Today brings news of two recently filed cases and a settlement, but not all of the cases are out of the U.S. state of Illinois, the filing capital of biometric privacy lawsuits.

A regional convenience chain, Jacksons Food Stores is being sued in Portland, Oregon, for violating a 2020 municipal code banning the use of facial recognition identification algorithms in “places of public accommodation by any private entity.”

A pair of plaintiffs say the chain continued to use the system after the law was enacted January 1, 2021. Jacksons operates about 33 stores in Portland, according to trade publication C-Store Dive. Jacksons has used Blue Line Technology’s First Line software.

Putative class action number 22CV40791 is being heard in Portland, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The class action seeks a cease-and-desist judgment and compensatory or statutory damages of $1,000 for each day the company is found to be in violation of the law but no less than $10 million.

Jacksons, which is based in Idaho, has been a focal point in the local debate about facial recognition.

The successful campaign to largely ban surveillance and identification often turned to Jacksons’ signs telling people who intend to enter one of the stores to look at a camera so that their face can be compared to a persona non grata database. The door does not open for anyone matched by the software with a photo on the database.

Amazon is reported to have contributed money to the effort to oppose the facial recognition ban.

The second new proposed class action (case 2022CH11985) is, in fact, being heard in Illinois, home of the Biometric Information Protection Act. Chicago-based SP Plus, a public garage operator, is accused of recording the faces of drivers at entry kiosks.

Among other mandates, BIPA requires companies to get express consent before scanning a person’s face and informing the person about how the data will be managed. The systems cannot enable a company to make money off the data (unless consent is given), and the plaintiffs allege use of biometrics has allowed SP Plus to save on labor costs.

SP Plus has already faced a BIPA suit for a biometric employee time and attendance system. That lawsuit was dismissed because a collective bargaining agreement takes precedence over BIPA.

According to the legal-affairs publication Cook County (Ill.) Record, the plaintiffs were unaware biometric data had been gathered and stored until a problem prevented the car from leaving. A garage employee then informed them of the camera system.

The last biometrics privacy case has ended in an $825,000 settlement in which the defendants, Par-A-Dice Hotel Casino and Boyd Gaming did not admit wrongdoing. A final approval hearing for the settlement is expected February 8.

Plaintiffs were anyone seen on security video footage collected From September 2020 to June 2021 at a sportsbook in western Illinois. No consent was requested or supplied, according to Top Class Actions, which publishes news on class actions. If it is a day ending in “y”, chances are that there is biometric privacy courtroom news to report.

Today brings news of two recently filed cases and a settlement, but not all of the cases are out of the U.S. state of Illinois, the filing capital of biometric privacy lawsuits.

A regional convenience chain, Jacksons Food Stores is being sued in Portland, Oregon, for violating a 2020 municipal code banning the use of facial recognition identification algorithms in “places of public accommodation by any private entity.”

A pair of plaintiffs say the chain continued to use the system after the law was enacted January 1, 2021. Jacksons operates about 33 stores in Portland, according to trade publication C-Store Dive. Jacksons has used Blue Line Technology’s First Line software.

Putative class action number 22CV40791 is being heard in Portland, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The class action seeks a cease-and-desist judgment and compensatory or statutory damages of $1,000 for each day the company is found to be in violation of the law but no less than $10 million.

Jacksons, which is based in Idaho, has been a focal point in the local debate about facial recognition.

The successful campaign to largely ban surveillance and identification often turned to Jacksons’ signs telling people who intend to enter one of the stores to look at a camera so that their face can be compared to a persona non grata database. The door does not open for anyone matched by the software with a photo on the database.

Amazon is reported to have contributed money to the effort to oppose the facial recognition ban.

The second new proposed class action (case 2022CH11985) is, in fact, being heard in Illinois, home of the Biometric Information Protection Act. Chicago-based SP Plus, a public garage operator, is accused of recording the faces of drivers at entry kiosks.

Among other mandates, BIPA requires companies to get express consent before scanning a person’s face and informing the person about how the data will be managed. The systems cannot enable a company to make money off the data (unless consent is given), and the plaintiffs allege use of biometrics has allowed SP Plus to save on labor costs.

SP Plus has already faced a BIPA suit for a biometric employee time and attendance system. That lawsuit was dismissed because a collective bargaining agreement takes precedence over BIPA.

According to the legal-affairs publication Cook County (Ill.) Record, the plaintiffs were unaware biometric data had been gathered and stored until a problem prevented the car from leaving. A garage employee then informed them of the camera system.

The last biometrics privacy case has ended in an $825,000 settlement in which the defendants, Par-A-Dice Hotel Casino and Boyd Gaming did not admit wrongdoing. A final approval hearing for the settlement is expected February 8.

Plaintiffs were anyone seen on security video footage collected From September 2020 to June 2021 at a sportsbook in western Illinois. No consent was requested or supplied, according to Top Class Actions, which publishes news on class actions.  Read More   

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