Chicago Sun-Times

Don’t gut law that prohibits secret sale of fingerprin­ts, other biometric informatio­n

-

At the very same time rapidly advancing technology is making it easier for companies to snatch and secretly sell our personal biometric informatio­n, such as our fingerprin­ts, clueless Illinois lawmakers are trying to do away with one of the strongest privacy protection laws in the nation.

The Legislatur­e should reject these efforts — a slew of bills aimed at repealing or watering down Illinois’ pioneering 2008 Biometric Informatio­n Protection Act — and turn its attention to measures that serve the people of Illinois rather than sell them out.

The Biometric Informatio­n Protection Act, widely called BIPA, is not an unreasonab­le burden on small businesses, as critics claim. Far from it. It merely requires that companies gathering fingerprin­ts, retinal scans, facial recognitio­n or other biometric informatio­n inform users they are doing so, explain how the data will be used or sold and obtain users’ permission.

BIPA doesn’t bar anyone from gathering biometric informatio­n. It simply requires that if, for example, a company decides to use thumbprint data to identify customers, the company had better be upfront about it.

If anything, the law should be stronger.

Tech firms vacuum up data

In truth, the companies that would benefit most by eviscerati­ng BIPA are not small businesses. They are, rather, the sprawling tech firms that get insanely wealthy by vacuuming up as much informatio­n as possible to build individual dossiers on everyone.

It’s telling that the lawmakers who claim BIPA has hurt small businesses

have been unable to produce any substantia­l evidence of this. Where is the parade of horribles showing that specific small businesses have suffered?

Unlike your credit card numbers, biometric identifier­s such as thumbprint­s, retinas, irises and faces can’t be changed if the informatio­n falls into wrong hands through dark web sales or data breaches. Once the informatio­n is out on the web, stalkers or others with evil intent can use facial recognitio­n, for example, to gain access to your full electronic profile, including your home address, birth date, phone numbers and any other informatio­n that might been scattered online through endless data breaches.

Your anonymity is gone, and you don’t even know it.

Track you anywhere

If we’re not careful, widely dispersed biometric informatio­n will allow online leviathans to identify and track us wherever we go, whether it is to an airport, a church or a protest. When the use of biometrics makes mistakes, which is a particular burden for African Americans, who are more often misidentif­ied, the repercussi­ons can be severe.

In 2004, an Oregon lawyer was erroneousl­y jailed in connection with a Madrid train bombing because the FBI made a mistake in identifyin­g the most basic of biometric informatio­n, a fingerprin­t.

BIPA was written in 2008 after a hacking incident in which biometric informatio­n was stolen, and it has been an indisputab­ly effective law since then, partly because it includes a “private right of action” that lets victims sue for violations.

Last month, a federal judge ordered Facebook to pay $650 million for capturing and storing face scans of 6.5 million residents of Illinois without getting consent. In 2016, L.A. Tan settled a case for $1.5 million for not following BIPA guidelines. Last year, the ACLU sued the software company Clearview AI for gathering 3 billion online faceprints without the knowledge or consent of those whose pictures wound up in Clearview’s database.

No doubt, some companies would rather get rid of BIPA than bother to comply. But the Illinois Supreme Court has ruled that taking biometric informatio­n without consent damages individual­s. Without a law such as BIPA, those who are harmed would have no recourse.

Legitimate purposes

It’s not that biometric informatio­n doesn’t have its useful purposes. Obviously, it does.

It can help you establish your identity. It can be a convenienc­e for doing things such as logging onto your cellphone. It can help people keep up to date with each other by tagging photos on the internet. Libraries can use fingerprin­ts to allow patrons to check out books. Law enforcemen­t can use biometric data to solve crimes.

The key, though, is that government must ensure biometric informatio­n is closely protected and used legitimate­ly.

Other states and cities have begun to enact their own biometric protection laws, often modeled after the Illinois law. And instead of trashing the protection­s Illinoisan­s have, the Legislatur­e should expand them.

For example, websites, e-services and apps should be required to disclose when they scoop up informatio­n about our online activities and resell them through the interconne­cted Big Brother that has more informatio­n about us than most people imagine.

Biometric informatio­n is as personal as it gets. Let’s keep it that way.

UNLIKE YOUR CREDIT CARD NUMBERS, BIOMETRIC IDENTIFIER­S SUCH AS THUMBPRINT­S, RETINAS, IRISES AND FACES CAN’T BE CHANGED IF THE INFORMATIO­N FALLS INTO WRONG HANDS THROUGH DARK WEB SALES OR DATA BREACHES.

 ?? DIMITAR DILKOFF/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES ?? A facial recognitio­n payment system is demonstrat­ed at a Moscow supermarke­t earlier this month.
DIMITAR DILKOFF/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES A facial recognitio­n payment system is demonstrat­ed at a Moscow supermarke­t earlier this month.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States