Milwaukee Police Consider Controversial Mugshot Trade for Facial Recognition Technology
The facial recognition industry is notorious for its questionable practices, and recent developments in Milwaukee have raised significant ethical concerns. Police officials are contemplating a deal that would involve trading 2.5 million mugshots for free access to advanced facial recognition software—an arrangement that appears alarmingly dubious.
According to a report from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, this potential agreement was discussed during a recent meeting of the city’s Fire and Police Commission. Milwaukee police have previously borrowed facial recognition technology from nearby departments, but this new deal proposes that the city would receive two free search licenses from Biometrica, a leading software provider that already partners with various law enforcement agencies across the United States, in exchange for mugshots and arrest records that span decades.
While the specific plans for the mugshots remain unspecified, they are likely intended to enhance the machine learning algorithms that power Biometrica’s software. The company has yet to respond to inquiries from Gizmodo regarding its usage of these images. However, it is not uncommon for facial recognition technologies to leverage datasets obtained without consent. For instance, Clearview AI famously compiled millions of images from social media, while PimEyes took photographs of deceased individuals for its algorithms. Furthermore, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) maintains a mugshot database that includes images of vulnerable demographics for testing purposes.
In an email to Gizmodo, representatives from the Milwaukee police confirmed that no contract has been finalized yet, stating, “We aim for transparency with the community we serve, which outweighs any urgency to acquire.” However, even at this early stage, the proposal raises significant red flags.
Concerns Over Facial Recognition Bias and Inequities
The inaccuracies of facial recognition technology, particularly in identifying individuals with darker skin tones, have been well-documented. A spokesperson for the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin, David Gwidt, shared concerns via email: “There have been multiple wrongful arrests attributed to the reliance on flawed facial recognition results, primarily affecting Black individuals.”
Privacy Issues and Lack of Consent
Another pressing concern tied to this proposal is the absence of mechanisms for informing individuals, obtaining their consent, or providing an opt-out option. Wisconsin currently lacks explicit biometric privacy laws. While only a handful of states offer some protections, Illinois leads the way with regulations that extend beyond commercial use. In Wisconsin, mugshots are considered public records, meaning they can typically be accessed by anyone with a valid interest.
Although Milwaukee police are not legally obligated to notify individuals, this ethical gray area is troubling. Many people understandably do not wish to have their faces utilized in training surveillance systems. Additionally, facial recognition companies are not exempt from data security breaches. As noted by Forbes, biometric data breaches can lead to serious outcomes, including identity theft, leaving individuals vulnerable as they cannot simply “change” their facial features. This raises the crucial question: Is it ethical for Milwaukee police to shoulder this risk on behalf of its citizens?
Historical Context and Ethical Implications
The United States has a troubling history of ethical oversights and exploitation of marginalized communities, especially in the name of technological advancement. The proposed deal risks perpetuating this legacy in the digital sphere. Jeramie Scott, Senior Counsel at EPIC, commented via email, “The irony is that this arrangement would likely utilize millions of mugshots predominantly belonging to people of color to develop technology that will be disproportionately deployed against these very individuals, exacerbating existing racial injustices within the criminal justice system.”
Lack of Regulation and Oversight
It seems unlikely that comprehensive federal regulations on facial recognition will be forthcoming. Although Madison, Wisconsin’s capital, banned the technology in 2020, the state has not implemented its own prohibitions, nor does Milwaukee have regulations governing existing surveillance technology employed by the police. Scott suggests that the most prudent course of action would be to halt the proposed transaction and reconsider the use of this technology, especially in the absence of robust laws to impose meaningful restrictions.
Community Response and Possible Next Steps
Recently, the local ACLU urged Milwaukee to pause any new surveillance initiatives for two years. The organization also advocates for establishing regulations for current technologies while ensuring opportunities for community input. Although the Milwaukee police have stated they intend to formulate a policy ensuring that no individual is arrested solely based on facial recognition matches, the lack of accountability measures remains a critical issue.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
What is the potential deal between Milwaukee Police and Biometrica?
The potential deal involves Milwaukee police trading 2.5 million mugshots for free access to facial recognition software from Biometrica.
Why are there ethical concerns regarding this deal?
The deal raises concerns due to the lack of consent from individuals whose mugshots are used and issues regarding racial bias in facial recognition technology.
Are there privacy laws in Wisconsin regarding biometric data?
Wisconsin lacks specific biometric privacy laws, making it easier for authorities to use mugshots without notifying individuals.
What are the implications of using facial recognition technology on marginalized communities?
The use of facial recognition technology can exacerbate existing policing disparities and lead to wrongful arrests, particularly affecting people of color.
How can the community get involved in shaping surveillance technology regulations?
Community members can participate in local meetings, advocate for transparency, and support initiatives aimed at establishing stricter regulations on surveillance technologies.