4 ms·

How is this not slander? Falsely telling someone that you're a thief with real worldly consequences like getting kicked out of a store should have real legal co

How is this not slander? Falsely telling someone that you're a thief with real worldly consequences like getting kicked out of a store should have real legal consequences.

nothercastle 2y ago
This is the uk, you probably don’t have much rights to stop intrusive public private rights violations
_lvbh 2y ago
Only if you have the money to sue. Things being the way they are, rather than fixing the issue, they would more likely simply increase the confidence threshold based on whether you look wealthy enough to sue
OptionOfT 2y ago
Slander requires a third person. The person from the store telling you you're a thief might be wrong, but it's not slander. I'm not sure about the computer program though. It telling a third person (i.e. the person from the store) would be libel, but since it is the result of a calculation, I'm not sure if it's considered libel.
- prepend 2y ago
  Facewatch is telling the store. Technically, it’s probably saying “there’s an 80% chance this person matches a thief” and the store is interpreting that as “ban them.” I don’t know UK slander laws, but in the US, it has to be incorrect to be slander. So this probably wouldn’t pass the test.
- michaelmrose 2y ago
  If its said in public the general public is the audience that hears the slander. If the store had even the slightest amount of brains they would have simply asked the person to leave without saying anything about the cause.
- mytailorisrich 2y ago
  As long as the accusation was made in public with other customers around it can be slander. In the UK it would be for the defendant (I.e. security guard/store) to prove that the claim was actually true. So in this case they would be stuffed. The person should definitely contact a solicitor.
throwaway14356 2y ago
she should get a free candybar.
whimsicalism 2y ago
mistaken arrests aren’t slander
- michaelmrose 2y ago
  From the story. "Within less than a minute, I'm approached by a store worker who comes up to me and says, 'You're a thief, you need to leave the store'." Knowing that one in 40 people so flagged aren't guilty of a crime means they are deliberately imposing upon those so flagged. The choice to use a faulty tech isn't itself a mistake its a choice. EG if you exposed a million people to this tech daily you would falsely arrest 11,000 people.
- ajb 2y ago
  In the UK, only police ('sworn constables') have legal protection when conducting an arrest. Ordinary people conducting a 'citizens arrest' are committing a crime if they make a mistake (false imprisonment). Store workers are not usually sworn constables. In any case, the article is not about an arrest. Making someone leave is not an arrest, it's the opposite (an arrest is detaining someone).
mikrotikker 2y ago
Remember that doco on Netflix where black people were complaining and trying to solve for not being correctly detected by facial recognition tech? They had a genetic advantage against FRT.

How is this not slander? Falsely telling someone that you're a thief with real worldly consequences like getting kicked out of a store should have real legal consequences.

nothercastle 2y ago

This is the uk, you probably don’t have much rights to stop intrusive public private rights violations

_lvbh 2y ago

Only if you have the money to sue. Things being the way they are, rather than fixing the issue, they would more likely simply increase the confidence threshold based on whether you look wealthy enough to sue

OptionOfT 2y ago

Slander requires a third person. The person from the store telling you you're a thief might be wrong, but it's not slander. I'm not sure about the computer program though. It telling a third person (i.e. the person from the store) would be libel, but since it is the result of a calculation, I'm not sure if it's considered libel.

prepend 2y ago
Facewatch is telling the store. Technically, it’s probably saying “there’s an 80% chance this person matches a thief” and the store is interpreting that as “ban them.” I don’t know UK slander laws, but in the US, it has to be incorrect to be slander. So this probably wouldn’t pass the test.
michaelmrose 2y ago
If its said in public the general public is the audience that hears the slander. If the store had even the slightest amount of brains they would have simply asked the person to leave without saying anything about the cause.
mytailorisrich 2y ago
As long as the accusation was made in public with other customers around it can be slander. In the UK it would be for the defendant (I.e. security guard/store) to prove that the claim was actually true. So in this case they would be stuffed. The person should definitely contact a solicitor.

throwaway14356 2y ago

she should get a free candybar.

whimsicalism 2y ago

mistaken arrests aren’t slander

michaelmrose 2y ago
From the story. "Within less than a minute, I'm approached by a store worker who comes up to me and says, 'You're a thief, you need to leave the store'." Knowing that one in 40 people so flagged aren't guilty of a crime means they are deliberately imposing upon those so flagged. The choice to use a faulty tech isn't itself a mistake its a choice. EG if you exposed a million people to this tech daily you would falsely arrest 11,000 people.
ajb 2y ago
In the UK, only police ('sworn constables') have legal protection when conducting an arrest. Ordinary people conducting a 'citizens arrest' are committing a crime if they make a mistake (false imprisonment). Store workers are not usually sworn constables. In any case, the article is not about an arrest. Making someone leave is not an arrest, it's the opposite (an arrest is detaining someone).

mikrotikker 2y ago

Remember that doco on Netflix where black people were complaining and trying to solve for not being correctly detected by facial recognition tech? They had a genetic advantage against FRT.