Abstract
General ignorance of the range and kinds and implications of the use of FRT raises ethical and legal questions. Some general points may be widely known. For instance, how FRT is used to identify individuals by converting their facial features into digital data and comparing that real-time or recorded data with images stored in databases. The stored images have usually been harvested from individuals who supplied an identity photograph, such as for a passport, driving licence or travel pass. So far, so good. But how far does the average citizen understand that whilst this use of images in identity photographs can also facilitate the application process, it is also an integral part of the document containing other information, and the database that is created may be ethically problematic. This is especially true when used or accessed covertly by agencies without explicit consent and not directly associated with the primary purpose of the photograph. Therefore, this chapter examines how autonomy, liberty and privacy are affected by FRT and presents some elements of an ethical framework, from which FRT’s impact on autonomy, liberty and privacy can be assessed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
EFF.
- 2.
Federal Bureau of Investigation: Next Generation Identification (NGI).
- 3.
Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System.
- 4.
EFF op cit.
- 5.
Edgar (2017).
- 6.
Chesterman (2011), p. 145. Citing ICO and Parliamentary reports.
- 7.
Ibid, p. 150.
- 8.
- 9.
Ibid.
- 10.
Dworkin (1988, reprinted 1997).
- 11.
Kant (1781).
- 12.
Mill (1859).
- 13.
Dworkin (1988), p. 17 op cit.
- 14.
Frankfurt (1971).
- 15.
Dworkin (1988), pp. 17; 20–21 op cit.
- 16.
See Waldron (2005).
- 17.
Heteronomy: the opposite of autonomy.
- 18.
Waldron (2005), p. 307 (my italics).
- 19.
Lawrence (2005), p. 136.
- 20.
Nussbaum (1995), p. 257.
- 21.
Garfinkel (2001), p. 65.
- 22.
Pink (2011), pp. 541–563.
- 23.
Christman (2018).
- 24.
Berlin (1958).
- 25.
Lane (2007).
- 26.
Ibid.
- 27.
For instance, GDPR. But, whether the GDPR alleviates these uncertainties, especially after, for example, the debacle over the Facebook app that Cambridge Analytica (the UK based data analytics consultancy) devised to unlawfully harvest the data from Facebook account holders, remains to be seen.
- 28.
Kafka (1925).
- 29.
Ibid.
- 30.
Ibid, pp. 1–3.
- 31.
Hague (2011).
- 32.
Foucault (1977), p. 213. The King was Louis XIV who ruled France from 1643 to 1715.
- 33.
Ibid, p. 214.
- 34.
Ibid, p. 214.
- 35.
The Panopticon in the above ways can act as a laboratory that acts as a machine that “carries out experiments, to alter behaviour, to train or correct individuals” (Foucault 1977, p. 203). Thus, the Panopticon not only acts as a vehicle to carry out tasks but also as a disciplinary apparatus.
- 36.
- 37.
- 38.
See MacKinnon (1989).
- 39.
Gavison (1980), pp. 421, 471.
- 40.
Ibid, p. 423.
- 41.
Ibid, p. 424.
- 42.
Solove (2011).
- 43.
Assuming that is no return to sender address on the back of the envelope.
- 44.
Nissenbaum (2010).
- 45.
Berle (2011), pp. 43–44.
- 46.
Gavison (1980), p. 436.
- 47.
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).
- 48.
Wacks (1989) (revised 1993), p. 20.
- 49.
Warren and Brandeis (1890).
- 50.
Berlin (1958).
- 51.
Wacks R op cit, p. 14.
- 52.
Campbell v MGN Ltd.
- 53.
Marshall (2009).
- 54.
Ibid, p. 52.
- 55.
Ibid cited by Marshall (2009).
- 56.
Ibid, p. 52.
References
Berle I (2011) Privacy and confidentiality: what’s the difference? J Vis Commun 34(1):43–44. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/17453054.2011.550845?journalCode=ijau20. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Berlin I (1958) Two concepts of liberty in Isaiah Berlin 1969: four essays on liberty. OUP, Oxford
Bloustein E (1964) Privacy as an aspect of human dignity: an answer to Dean Prosser. N Y Univ Law Rev 39:962–1007
Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] UKHL, 22 per Lord Hoffman paragraphs 50, 51. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200304/ldjudgmt/jd040506/campbe-2.htm. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Chesterman S (2011) One nation under surveillance: a new social contract to defend freedom without sacrificing liberty. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 145. Citing ICO and Parliamentary reports
Christman J (2018) Autonomy in moral and political philosophy. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2018 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/autonomy-moral/. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Dixon P (2010) The one-way-mirror-society: privacy implications of the new digital signage networks. http://www.worldprivacyforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/onewaymirrorsocietyfs.pdf. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Dworkin G (1988, reprinted 1997) The theory and practice of autonomy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Edgar TH (2017) Beyond Snowden: privacy, mass surveillance and the struggle to reform the NSA. The Brookings Institution
Electronic Frontier Foundation: FBI’s Next Generation Identification Biometric Database. https://www.eff.org/foia/fbis-next-generation-identification-biometrics-database. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Electronic Information Privacy Center: European Parliament Committee Approves Comprehensive Privacy Law. https://epic.org/2013/10/european-parliament-committee.html. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Federal Bureau of Investigation CJIS Division: Next Generation Identification. https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/fingerprints-and-other-biometrics/ngi. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Foucault M (1977) The birth of the prison (trans: Sheridan A) (First published as Surveiller et punir: Naissance de la prison. Éditions Gallimard, Paris, 1975; Penguin Books 1991)
Frankfurt HG (1971) Freedom of the will and the concept of a person. J Philos 68(1):5–20. Published by: Journal of Philosophy, Inc. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2024717. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Fried C (1970) An anatomy of values. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Garfinkel S (2001, pbk) Database nation: the death of privacy in the 21st century. O’Reilly & Associates Inc, Sebastopol
Gavison RE (1980) Privacy and the limits of law. Yale Law J 89(3):421–471. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2060957. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Gill M, Spriggs A (2005) Accessing the impact of CCTV Home Office Research Study 292 Dev & Statistics Directorate, Home Office Research. www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs05/hors292.pdf via Google. Accessed 12 Aug 2019
Hague R (2011) Autonomy and identity, the politics of who we are. Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon
Inness J (1992) Privacy, intimacy and isolation. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Kafka F (1925) The Trial (trans: Parry I). Penguin Books 1994, Penguin Classics 2000
Kant I (1781) Critique of pure reason. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/4280/4280-h/4280-h.htm. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Lane R (2007) Berlin on positive liberty. http://www.westga.edu/~rlane/law/lecture23_freedom2.html. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Lawrence MA (2005) Reviving a natural right: the freedom of autonomy. Willamette Law Rev, June 2005; MSU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 02. http://ssrn.com/abstract=755564. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
MacKinnon C (1989) Toward a feminist theory of the state. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Marshall J (2009) Personal freedom through human rights law? Autonomy, identity and integrity under the European Convention on Human Rights. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden
Mill JS (1859) In: Gray J, Smith GW (eds) (1991) J. S. Mill on liberty in focus. Routledge, London & New York
Nissenbaum H (2010) Privacy in context: technology, policy and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press, Stanford
Nussbaum MC (1995) Objectification. Philos Public Aff 24(4). http://www.mit.edu/~shaslang/mprg/nussbaumO.pdf. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Pink T (2011) Thomas Hobbes and the ethics of freedom. Inquiry 54(5):541–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2011.608886. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Rachels J (1975) Why privacy is important. Philos Public Aff 4:323–333
Solove DJ (2011) Nothing to hide: the false trade off between privacy and security. Yale University Press, New Haven and London, p 180
Wacks R (1989) (revised 1993) Personal information: privacy and the law. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Waldron J (2005) Moral autonomy and personal autonomy. In: Christman J, Anderson J (eds) Autonomy and the challenges to liberalism, new essays. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610325.015. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Warren SD, Brandeis LD (1890) The right to privacy (the implicit made explicit). Harv Law Rev: 193–220. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1321160. Accessed 10 Aug 2019
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Berle, I. (2020). Autonomy, Liberty and Privacy. In: Face Recognition Technology. Law, Governance and Technology Series, vol 41. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36887-6_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36887-6_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-36886-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-36887-6
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)