Balancing Profit and Ethics: The Case of Clearview AI.

Clearview AI

Clearview AI, founded in 2017 by Hoan Ton-That (an Australian Entrepreneur) and Richard Schwartz (An American Psychologist), developed facial recognition technology using a huge image database from public websites and social media. This technology can match a photo to billions of images in seconds, providing names and links to related online profiles. This makes it a powerful tool for law enforcement and other groups needing quick and accurate identification.

Clearview AI’s system collects images from social media sites like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Combining these images into one large database has created one of the world’s largest facial recognition databases. The software uses advanced algorithms to find matches and provides links to the original images.

Clearview AI markets its technology mainly to law enforcement agencies, claiming it helps identify criminals and solve cases. It has been used to identify shoplifters, child molesters, and violent criminals, and solve cold cases. Other potential uses include private security, banking, and retail, where facial recognition can improve security and customer service.

Ethical Issues of Facial Recognition Technologies

Facial recognition technology can lead to an invasive level of surveillance, where individuals’ movements and activities are constantly monitored without their consent. This raises significant privacy issues, as people may be unaware that they are being watched. Additionally, the collection and storage of facial data pose significant risks if the data is not properly secured, potentially leading to breaches and misuse of personal information. Moreover, facial recognition technology also exhibits biases based on race, gender, and age, leading to higher error rates for certain demographic groups. This can have serious consequences, such as wrongful arrests, denial of services, loss of reputation, reinforcing existing social inequalities, etc.

Individuals are often subjected to facial recognition without their explicit consent, undermining their autonomy and control over personal data. Even when consent is obtained, it may not be fully informed, as individuals might not be aware of how their data will be used, stored, and shared. Many organizations using facial recognition technology do not disclose how the technology works, what data is collected, and how it is used, making it difficult to hold them accountable. Furthermore, there is often a lack of clear regulations and standards governing the use of FRT, leading to inconsistent practices and potential misuse.

Clearview AI has faced numerous legal challenges across multiple countries due to its controversial use of facial recognition technology. The company has been involved in lawsuits and regulatory actions in at least five countries: the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, and Australia.

In the United States, Clearview AI has faced several lawsuits for alleged violations of privacy and data protection laws. In the United Kingdom, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) fined Clearview for collecting images without consent. Similar actions have been taken in France and Italy, where data protection authorities have ordered Clearview to delete data and imposed fines for GDPR violations. In Australia, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) ordered Clearview to cease collecting images and delete existing data of Australian citizens.

Overall, Clearview AI has been scrutinized and penalized for its practices in various jurisdictions, reflecting widespread concern over privacy and data protection issues related to its technology​

Questions:

  1. How would utilitarian philosophers like Jeremy Bentham or John Stuart Mill evaluate the ethicality of Clearview AI’s practices, considering the overall happiness and potential suffering involved?
  2. What specific business ethics principles are at stake in the practices of Clearview AI?

error: Content is protected !!