4 ms·

> “Flock unlawfully made data collected within Evanston and the State of Illinois available to federal agencies,” Ruggie wrote, referencing the findings of Gian

> “Flock unlawfully made data collected within Evanston and the State of Illinois available to federal agencies,” Ruggie wrote, referencing the findings of Giannoulias’ audit. “This is not a procedural error; it is an intentional and unauthorized disclosure of protected data… Let it be absolutely clear: this breach is material, intentional, and cannot be cured. The City will not entertain remediation efforts or renegotiation.” [0] I can't seem to access the audit in question [1] and there are connected articles that seem to also be talking about forest park police using camera readers. Whatever the case, there seems to be reasonable doubt in the trust in Flock Safety. I don't understand how an illegal termination of contract would result in anything other than Evanston having to pay out the remaining fees and maybe a cancellation fee. [0] https://evanstonroundtable.com/2025/08/28/flock-challenges-citys-termination-of-contract-for-license-plate-readers/ https://evanstonroundtable.com/2025/08/28/flock-challenges-c... [1] https://www.ilsos.gov/news/2025/august-25-2025-giannoulias-audit-finds-license-plate-reader-company-in-violation-of-state-law.html https://www.ilsos.gov/news/2025/august-25-2025-giannoulias-a...

serbuvlad 1y ago
While all that may be very true, and you may be right, that is all for the judge to decide, is it not? I am not taking the side of the company, I am taking the side of rule of law and due process.
sidewndr46 1y ago
This is so abundantly hilarious to read. Cooperating with the Federal government cannot plausibly be a crime in the United States. It'd be like if I was sentenced to a Federal pentitiary, reported in to serve my sentence and was then found guilty of collaboration with the Federal government in some state court. Realistically if Flock didn't cooperate, the Federal government would just show up with a warrant, subpoena, or other document. Given that Flock themselves is not being investigated, there isn't really any incentive for them to go that route. Now the state may be abundantly pissed that the Feds are in their backyard, but they have the right to regulate interstate commerce. They are entirely within their rights to also terminate the contract of course.
- grayhatter 1y ago
  > Cooperating with the Federal government cannot plausibly be a crime in the United States. Authotrized agents from government show up and demand that I turn over video they call evidence. Then then suggest that I should continue to record video and that I should also enable audio recording too. I comply with all 3 requests. Later the court rules that original request was an illegal search and seizure, and that no reasonable agent would suggest that I should continue to record video with audio, and in this case/example, elects to reject a qualified immunity claim from the agency. I just participated in an illegal act by cooperating with the federal government. > Realistically if Flock didn't cooperate, the Federal government would just show up with a warrant, subpoena, or other document. Given that Flock themselves is not being investigated, there isn't really any incentive for them to go that route. It's a weird take to suggest that the federal governnment themselves shouldn't need to be bothered by following the law they are expected to enforce... If they want data a state law says is private.... they should get a warrant. There's a word for the belief that you should do what the executive branch says without demanding they follow the the law... wanna guess what that word is?
  - sidewndr46 1y ago
    The sentence "I should record audio and video in this case and elects to reject a qualified immunity claim." is English but not even comprehensible. I have no idea what you mean. Joseph Nacchio certainly would not agree with your opinion here that "they should get a warrant"
    - grayhatter 1y ago
      Yeah, phone artifact, sorry about that. let me try to fix it. Edited the original comment, hope that's better?
    - grayhatter 1y ago
      > Joseph Nacchio certainly would not agree with your opinion here that "they should get a warrant" Citing Wikipedia > He claimed in court, with documentation, that his was the only company to demand legal authority for surreptitious mass surveillance demanded by the NSA Sounds like he would agree with me? Or do you mean how he was convicted of insider trading which appears to be unethical retaliation for resisting an illegal request? I refuse to advocate that anyone should act unethically because they fear retaliation. whether or not it's the prudent decision, I'm too much of a pedant with low self-preservation instincts to behave in such a despicable way.

serbuvlad 1y ago

While all that may be very true, and you may be right, that is all for the judge to decide, is it not? I am not taking the side of the company, I am taking the side of rule of law and due process.

sidewndr46 1y ago

This is so abundantly hilarious to read. Cooperating with the Federal government cannot plausibly be a crime in the United States. It'd be like if I was sentenced to a Federal pentitiary, reported in to serve my sentence and was then found guilty of collaboration with the Federal government in some state court. Realistically if Flock didn't cooperate, the Federal government would just show up with a warrant, subpoena, or other document. Given that Flock themselves is not being investigated, there isn't really any incentive for them to go that route. Now the state may be abundantly pissed that the Feds are in their backyard, but they have the right to regulate interstate commerce. They are entirely within their rights to also terminate the contract of course.

grayhatter 1y ago
> Cooperating with the Federal government cannot plausibly be a crime in the United States. Authotrized agents from government show up and demand that I turn over video they call evidence. Then then suggest that I should continue to record video and that I should also enable audio recording too. I comply with all 3 requests. Later the court rules that original request was an illegal search and seizure, and that no reasonable agent would suggest that I should continue to record video with audio, and in this case/example, elects to reject a qualified immunity claim from the agency. I just participated in an illegal act by cooperating with the federal government. > Realistically if Flock didn't cooperate, the Federal government would just show up with a warrant, subpoena, or other document. Given that Flock themselves is not being investigated, there isn't really any incentive for them to go that route. It's a weird take to suggest that the federal governnment themselves shouldn't need to be bothered by following the law they are expected to enforce... If they want data a state law says is private.... they should get a warrant. There's a word for the belief that you should do what the executive branch says without demanding they follow the the law... wanna guess what that word is?
- sidewndr46 1y ago
  The sentence "I should record audio and video in this case and elects to reject a qualified immunity claim." is English but not even comprehensible. I have no idea what you mean. Joseph Nacchio certainly would not agree with your opinion here that "they should get a warrant"
  - grayhatter 1y ago
    Yeah, phone artifact, sorry about that. let me try to fix it. Edited the original comment, hope that's better?
  - grayhatter 1y ago
    > Joseph Nacchio certainly would not agree with your opinion here that "they should get a warrant" Citing Wikipedia > He claimed in court, with documentation, that his was the only company to demand legal authority for surreptitious mass surveillance demanded by the NSA Sounds like he would agree with me? Or do you mean how he was convicted of insider trading which appears to be unethical retaliation for resisting an illegal request? I refuse to advocate that anyone should act unethically because they fear retaliation. whether or not it's the prudent decision, I'm too much of a pedant with low self-preservation instincts to behave in such a despicable way.