Skip to main content

San Francisco bans facial recognition software

Lawmakers in San Francisco have voted to outlaw the use of facial recognition tools. It is a move which will have implications for police surveillance – and also for transit agencies. It was reported last year that Bay Area Rapid Transit (Bart) was considering the introduction of face recognition software on its cameras, for example – but Bart will not now be able to do so. The 8-to-1 vote by the Board of Supervisors means San Francisco is the first city in the US to take this step – and the decis
May 15, 2019 Read time: 2 mins

Lawmakers in San Francisco have voted to outlaw the use of facial recognition tools.

It is a move which will have implications for police surveillance – and also for transit agencies.

It was reported last year that Bay Area Rapid Transit (7357 Bart) was considering the introduction of face recognition software on its cameras, for example – but Bart will not now be able to do so.

The 8-to-1 vote by the Board of Supervisors means San Francisco is the first city in the US to take this step – and the decision may form a precedent which other cities feel bound to follow.

Some police forces are already using live facial recognition (LFR) tools for surveillance.

Civil liberties group Big Brother Watch said last year that the London Metropolitan Police’s use of LFR in public spaces was “98% inaccurate – it identified people correctly only 2% of the time”. Elsewhere in the UK, South Wales Police’s live facial recognition “was inaccurate 91% of the time and had resulted in the misidentification of 2,451 people”.

In an interim report earlier this year, the UK government’s Biometrics and Forensics Ethics Group concluded: “There are a number of questions about: the accuracy of LFR technology; its potential for biased outputs and biased decision-making on the part of system operators; and an ambiguity about the nature of current deployments.”

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • UK transport operators raise concerns about financial impact of clean air policies
    May 22, 2018
    Over 85% of road transport professionals at the Microlise Transport conference believe measures to improve air quality will have a negative financial impact on their businesses. The findings come from a poll of 1,200 delegates at the road transport event in Coventry, UK. In addition, 92% think the needs of the transport industry are either not being considered, or only partially, in relation to the introduction of clean-air and low-emission zones. Three-quarters of respondents believe the government is
  • ChargeWheel sparks mobile EV charging in San Francisco
    April 8, 2019
    ChargeWheel has secured $1 million in funding to launch a mobile electric vehicle (EV) charging network in the San Francisco Bay Area. The network will be based on ChargeWheel’s mobile Energy Trailers, which don’t require a connection to the grid, and can therefore operate in any car park. The company says they offer a combined solar-powered generation and energy storage solution, and plans to deploy 100 in the Bay Area by the end of 2019. The units can simultaneously charge four EVs or up to 400 electric
  • Smart phones offer smarter way to pay for travel
    December 16, 2013
    David Crawford reviews developments in near field communications for mass transit payments. ‘A carefully-designed and well-implemented mobile near field communications (NFC) solutions can give passengers a compelling experience that will encourage them to make greater use of public transport.’ That was the confident conclusion of a recent joint White Paper drawn up by the International Association of Public Transport and the global mobile operators’ representative group GSMA.
  • Brooklyn eyes Bogota’s BRT system
    June 17, 2016
    David Crawford considers the increased interest in bus rapid transit and looks that the latest trends. Bus rapid transit (BRT) is gaining an increasingly high profile in the US public transport agenda, for two main reasons. One is the potential for ‘trains on wheels’ to save substantially on installation costs as compared with other modes such as underground metros or light-rail transit. Another, highlighted in the case of New York City, is the value of having a rapid surface-based alternative available whe