More Chicago cameras?

ArsTechnica had an interesting article today, the SunTimes also reported this story-slightly differently here. What I did find amusing is that the 'red light cameras' are not used to stop (no pun intended) people from running red lights, but instead as a source of revenue. By using the cameras to gather data about an automobile's insurance, the cameras and the system behind it, will query insurance agencies and write appropriate citations. However the SunTimes article also mentioned use of other surveillance cameras around the city to tie into the same system.

Really the reason I bring this story to light is that it ties into the spread of surveillance cameras throughout Chicago, and other major urban areas, and that it seems to be twisting a punishment into a revenue source. Spurred on by a few colleagues I have started to research into public surveillance networks and their effects on privacy. Unfortunately, the US is rather behind in the times in studying this convergence, save a few excellent authors. Possibly because the systems are not as pervasive. Yet camera systems seem to be popping up more frequently in American cities without a real debate or examination these systems have on privacy or concepts of privacy.

It is one thing to expect little privacy in public, but quite another for someone to watch and archive any and every move you make in public then protecting that data from abuse.

The Eyes of Chicago are on YOU

Mayor Daley of Chicago and Ray Orozco, executive director of the city’s Office of Emergency Management and Communications, announced that he would like to see CCTV cover the city.

What might come as a surprise, is my support of this plan. However, I have grave concerns over who has access to the system and retention of video.

As of now it appears only 911 dispatch operators have access to the network currently in place. As the system grows to cover the city, my concern is that other divisions will be granted access to the system and abuses will follow without strict legislation defining limits.

My next concern, peeked by a Facebook posting between Dr. Zimmer and Dr. Walker, both of UW-Milwaukee, relates to saved video. Will video of the system be archived or recorded. I am sure there is already in place an option to record video feeds to assist as evidence in court and review for further clues, if need be. However, will all video feeds be recorded? If so how long will the video remain archived?

In addition will the video be made available through Freedom of Information Act requests, it is after all a publicly created 'document' and as Illinois law says, "…it is declared to be the public policy of the State of Illinois that all persons are entitled to full and complete information regarding the affairs of government […] Such access is necessary to enable the people to fulfill their duties of discussing public issues fully and freely, making informed political judgments and monitoring government to ensure that it is being conducted in the public interest." (5 ILCS 140/1)

It has been many years since Katz v. United States where the "reasonable expectation" of privacy was born. But it is my opinion that an individual, even in public, has an expectation to not be monitored and recorded for their time in public spaces. Simply, I can agree that an expectation of privacy in public is non-existent. This is based partially on the thought that no one would follow all the actions of an individual, but the ability for the State to record the actions of anyone in public from the time they enter the public space until they leave amounts to nothing more than stalking.

Perhaps video surveillance, open to the public, covering all governmental offices is in order. (Slight joke)