> Clustering images by features seems to be pretty fundamental, and if it runs afoul of this law, then the law needs to be changed.
Fundamental to what, though? This court case is not about somehow criminalizing the existence or the use of this particular tech.
> I upload photos to Google Photos because I want them to be grouped and categorized so I can easily find them. That is, if I click on a picture of my daughter, or my wife, I want to see ALL pictures of I took of them grouped together.
Facebook is not Google Photos. The former is a social network, the latter is a service for storing, organizing and sharing photos. In my opinion, even Google Photos should implement a setting that disables this.
> Does this mean if my service measures the distance between the eyes, and the width of the mouth, and clusters photos by that, or by eye or hair color by using say, segmentation or histogram clustering, all of a sudden it's illegal? That would seem to be a fairly absurd and broad definition of biometric security information.
Come on, if you made the effort to read that part of the law, why did you stop there? No, it's not "suddenly illegal" to measure and gather that information. It's illegal to do without following certain rules about retention, destruction and usage of that information. It's in the very next section, here's an excerpt:
"(740 ILCS 14/15) Sec. 15. Retention; collection; disclosure; destruction.
(a) A private entity in possession of biometric identifiers or biometric information must develop a written policy, made available to the public, establishing a retention schedule and guidelines for permanently destroying biometric identifiers and biometric information when the initial purpose for collecting or obtaining such identifiers or information has been satisfied or within 3 years of the individual's last interaction with the private entity, whichever occurs first. Absent a valid warrant or subpoena issued by a court of competent jurisdiction, a private entity in possession of biometric identifiers or biometric information must comply with its established retention schedule and destruction guidelines."
Fundamental to what, though? This court case is not about somehow criminalizing the existence or the use of this particular tech.
> I upload photos to Google Photos because I want them to be grouped and categorized so I can easily find them. That is, if I click on a picture of my daughter, or my wife, I want to see ALL pictures of I took of them grouped together.
Facebook is not Google Photos. The former is a social network, the latter is a service for storing, organizing and sharing photos. In my opinion, even Google Photos should implement a setting that disables this.
> Does this mean if my service measures the distance between the eyes, and the width of the mouth, and clusters photos by that, or by eye or hair color by using say, segmentation or histogram clustering, all of a sudden it's illegal? That would seem to be a fairly absurd and broad definition of biometric security information.
Come on, if you made the effort to read that part of the law, why did you stop there? No, it's not "suddenly illegal" to measure and gather that information. It's illegal to do without following certain rules about retention, destruction and usage of that information. It's in the very next section, here's an excerpt:
"(740 ILCS 14/15) Sec. 15. Retention; collection; disclosure; destruction.
(a) A private entity in possession of biometric identifiers or biometric information must develop a written policy, made available to the public, establishing a retention schedule and guidelines for permanently destroying biometric identifiers and biometric information when the initial purpose for collecting or obtaining such identifiers or information has been satisfied or within 3 years of the individual's last interaction with the private entity, whichever occurs first. Absent a valid warrant or subpoena issued by a court of competent jurisdiction, a private entity in possession of biometric identifiers or biometric information must comply with its established retention schedule and destruction guidelines."