An Illinois woman filed a class action lawsuit against Target, accusing the retail giant of collecting and storing her biometric data, including face and fingerprint scans, without her consent in violation of state law.
Arnetta Dean, who filed the lawsuit with the intention of preventing Target from further violating the privacy rights of state residents, is also pursuing statutory damages for the company's alleged collection, storage and use of customers' biometric data, according to the lawsuit obtained by FOX 32 Chicago.
The lawsuit, filed last month in Cook County, claims Target's surveillance systems, including cameras with facial recognition technology installed in Illinois stores, "surreptitiously" collect biometric data on customers without their knowledge or consent.
"Target does not notify customers of this fact prior to store entry, nor does it obtain consent prior to collecting its customers' Biometric Data," the lawsuit said.
According to the lawsuit, Target violated the state's Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) by collecting, storing and using biometric information without obtaining written consent from customers or providing them with adequate information about data retention and destruction policies.
BIPA, which passed in 2008, states that companies in Illinois are prohibited from collecting, storing or giving out biometric data without providing notice and obtaining personal consent. Companies are also required to inform individuals of the specific purpose and duration of data collection, and they must disclose how the information will be retained and when the information will be destroyed. The lawsuit says Target failed to comply with the aforementioned requirements.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Friday April 19, @06:39PM (10 children)
I'm curious: when are they harvesting fingerprints? Surely they will administer a click-through license agreement along with the fingerprint data collection.
As for facial recognition... I'm expecting the lawyers to come to some kind of understanding where Target pays the plaintiff's lawyers a large sum of money, of which $0.41 per class member will be distributed upon request, and Target pinkie swears that they will never associate facial recognition data with customer identities again in the future. https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/452bdb65-06d0-4203-92b4-bddfa4775a73 [getyarn.io]
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 5, Touché) by JoeMerchant on Friday April 19, @07:17PM (3 children)
Flamebait? Who's the lawyer lover? Have you never received a class action settlement?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 19, @07:39PM (2 children)
The last one I received cost more to print and send than the amount of money on the check (the latter being a whole 17 cents).
(Score: 3, Interesting) by vux984 on Friday April 19, @07:53PM (1 child)
On the upside, it also cost them far more then the 17cents to issue it to you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 20, @04:41AM
Just tacked on to the price. Everything remains in equilibrium...
And furthermore, you have no assurances that everybody with a camera isn't doing this.
(Score: 2) by looorg on Friday April 19, @08:01PM (3 children)
I can understand the face, they could probably just lift that from all the cameras in the store. They'll get your from a lot of different angles etc. But the fingerprints? Some kind of scanner is needed or are they saying now that the cameras are so good that they can read your fingerprints from a distance while you are moving? They have cameras in, or at, groin level to film your hands specifically? Why do they need fingerprints to detect shoplifters?
That said it seem that the fingerprint part is just part of the lawsuit accusation, not something that Target has acknowledged.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday April 19, @08:20PM (2 children)
From your quote it seems like the "loss prevention center" is lifting fingerprints based on video footage of potential shoplifters - saw the perp touch this glass cabinet, lift prints from there for possible use as evidence...
Sound extreme? When I was working fast food, one of the employees lifted the evening cash bag (with a whopping $700 in it) and threw it up on the roof. Cops were called, we were all detained for a while until they found the cash bag on the roof which they (at least said they) dusted for prints. They didn't ask for my prints, I think they got a confession from the guilty party on the spot.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Saturday April 20, @06:40AM (1 child)
How do you tell the fingerprint isn't from one of the other 27 customers who touched the glass?
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday April 20, @08:54AM
I suspect they guess. Probably track the customer around the store by video and pull prints from multiple sites. Not super reliable, but probably proof enough for their internal investigations.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Saturday April 20, @12:00AM
I'd also like to know exactly where they collect fingerprints.
A quick Google search suggests Target has their own large forensics department, so it sounds like anything you touch could be recorded.
Haven't been to Target in a long time but the Walmarts around here have installed these insulting little flaps you have to lift in front of a lot of products (the ones they have not locked up in cases yet), and most people would leave finger prints on those. A robotic voice screams: "THANK YOU FOR SHOPPING AT WALMART, BITCHES!"
Does Target have the same sort of thing now?
(Score: 4, Informative) by EvilSS on Saturday April 20, @12:03AM
(Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 19, @07:11PM (2 children)
The New York Post, pinnical of accurate unbiased reporting, lol.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 19, @07:42PM
Shoot the messenger much? A stopped (12-hour) clock can still be right two times per day.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Tork on Friday April 19, @08:01PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 19, @10:09PM
Next time I'm in the French Store [urbandictionary.com] I'll smear brie all over their frog faces!
Fingerprints, indeed!
(Score: 2) by EJ on Friday April 19, @10:40PM
I don't shop at Target for personal reasons. Stores should avoid politics and controversy.
Your job is to provide products and services without pushing ANY sort of agenda.
(Though I do appreciate patriotic decorations to acknowledge how good we actually have it here.)
(Score: 3, Touché) by kazzie on Saturday April 20, @11:57AM
I visited a US Target store for the first time last week. In Chicago.
I doubt that I'd be covered by this case though: there'll doubtless be exclusions allowing collection of any and all data about non-US citizens.
(Score: 4, Informative) by VLM on Saturday April 20, @05:50PM
Conspiracy theory or not:
Target knew this would be a shitstorm so they went turbo alphabet-people last year to position themselves as "the store for trans people" to divert attention from the upcoming surveillance problem.
I admit I only go to Target as some kind of self-flagellation thing for needing something RIGHT NOW and having failed to order it ahead of time from Amazon at a lower cost. The stores are not as full of shoppers as they used to be. Kind of like an overpriced gas station convenience store but carrying more product lines so if you really desperately need laundry detergent right now there's always Target.
Note that I can order stuff from Amazon while doing other things in mere minutes at most, whereas a drive to Target and waiting in line and walking around means at LEAST one hour calendar entry which makes Target pretty expensive to shop at. It's not that socks are 5% cheaper at Amazon (in fact, maybe they are not?) but that I only have X hours of spare time per day and Amazon takes up about zero of them which I can afford whereas Target would be a "substantial investment of my very limited spare time". It would be different if I were unemployed or retired or had no kids etc etc etc. Target is just too expensive to spend the time to shop at. Who has time for brick and mortar AND has the money to spend?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by iamjacksusername on Saturday April 20, @09:33PM
Target has been doing this since 2008. It is well-known in the academic community. They are running license plate recognition on all the video surveillance in their parking lots and they match it across their CC data. They are one of the largest buyers of psychographic data - they map geo data to license plate data. If you use a CC, they can tie the CC transaction to the bluetooth on your phone and map where you go in the stores.
There was a story in the WSJ 15 years ago - their head of marketing gave an example where they had an angry father come to a store demanding to know why Target was sending ads for pregnancy products to his 15-year old daughter. The father came back a week later and apologized - his daughter was pregnant. Target knew his daughter was pregnant before he did. That is how good their data is and that was back in 2008.