2 ms·
I would argue that if the data is stored, it is only a matter of time before it becomes monetized in the manner you are mentioning. There has to be a firewall t
by voisin 6y ago
I would argue that if the data is stored, it is only a matter of time before it becomes monetized in the manner you are mentioning. There has to be a firewall to prevent that step being taken. Mindlessly filming for future review in the event of a security issue is one thing. Intelligently analyzing the frames for identification purposes is where the feeling of “my privacy has been invaded, or could easily be in the future via storage of my likeness” comes from.
I don’t see this as a victimless act - just that the victimization is uncertain at present but almost 100% certain to occur the more this behaviour occurs.
- criddell 6y agoThey know you walked from Baby Gap to the food court, bought a pretzel, then left via the doors by California Pizza Kitchen. If you sue the mall, the court may agree your privacy has been violated and now are asking you to come up with a dollar figure for the harm done. How do you do that?
- voisin 6y agoThis argument assumes the court is looking only for compensatory damages whereas punitive damages are likely more applicable in an invasion of privacy case like this. No direct damages but the social implications demand a “whack on the nose” via punitive damages.