Facial Recognition Technology (FRT) significantly advances biometric systems by using facial features for identification. While beneficial for surveillance and identification, FRT raises privacy, ethical, and legal issues. This chapter highlights the urgent need for a balanced regulatory framework ensuring data protection, transparency, accountability, and algorithmic fairness. The study underscores the widespread use of FRT in government and commercial sectors, emphasising consent and the challenges of potential misuse. The chapter recommends a phased approach to FRT regulation, learning from frameworks like the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) and the Carpenter doctrine for proper consent. It suggests third-party testing, as proposed in New Jersey legislation, to build public trust and ensure FRT reliability. The research stresses the importance of clearly defining FRT deployment purposes and calls for collaborative governance to create adaptable regulations involving diverse stakeholders. It also highlights the need for international compliance, given FRT’s global impact. In conclusion, the chapter advocates for a robust legal framework addressing FRT’s unique challenges, balancing technological innovation with individual rights protection. This study offers valuable insights for policymakers, legal experts, and stakeholders, promoting regulations safeguarding civil liberties while leveraging FRT’s benefits.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Dissecting the Regulatory Landscape of Facial Recognition Technology

  • Nikhil Naren,
  • Amresh Mishra

摘要

Facial Recognition Technology (FRT) significantly advances biometric systems by using facial features for identification. While beneficial for surveillance and identification, FRT raises privacy, ethical, and legal issues. This chapter highlights the urgent need for a balanced regulatory framework ensuring data protection, transparency, accountability, and algorithmic fairness. The study underscores the widespread use of FRT in government and commercial sectors, emphasising consent and the challenges of potential misuse. The chapter recommends a phased approach to FRT regulation, learning from frameworks like the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) and the Carpenter doctrine for proper consent. It suggests third-party testing, as proposed in New Jersey legislation, to build public trust and ensure FRT reliability. The research stresses the importance of clearly defining FRT deployment purposes and calls for collaborative governance to create adaptable regulations involving diverse stakeholders. It also highlights the need for international compliance, given FRT’s global impact. In conclusion, the chapter advocates for a robust legal framework addressing FRT’s unique challenges, balancing technological innovation with individual rights protection. This study offers valuable insights for policymakers, legal experts, and stakeholders, promoting regulations safeguarding civil liberties while leveraging FRT’s benefits.