Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record
wltx.com191 points by aranaur 4 hours ago
191 points by aranaur 4 hours ago
I think the person requesting to access the data was doing the right thing and I agree with the judge’s ruling.
The fact that they’re gonna shut it down, implies the scale of indiscriminate nature of data capture and the volume of data being captured.
These cameras are popping up all over the nation and if people realize how much data is being captured and where that data is going (or who it’s being sold to) and how it’s being used by government and private entities they would be appalled.
There’s been exposés about these cameras, everything from AI misidentification of “stolen” (not) vehicles and erroneous arrests and police encounters, to analysis of shopping patterns being sold back to private entities for better ad targeting. It’s wild.
The laws need to be updated. CCTV in public used to be fine because no one was actually watching it unless there was an incident. Now it’s possible to have AI watch every camera and correlate everything everywhere we need new privacy laws to reflect this capability.
And the government needs to be restricted from buying data it wouldn’t be permitted to collect itself.
Yep, ban collection and pruchase of such data for everyone. Exceptions usually mean private companies hop in to offer the "service".
I think the current insane development are surveilance capitalists, trying to rush their panopticon to solidify their power. Guess that means no reasoable privacy law for the US, even under hypothetical president newsom.
Meh.
If the government is only restricted from buying the data, then they'll just have someone else buy it. Palantir is not the government. So they can buy the real time feed, analyze it in real time, and give the real time results of that analysis to the government without issue.
Restricting the government from buying that data does nothing. If you want to stop the government taking advantage of the data, then you would have to outlaw the collection of the data altogether. So that the initial collection of the data by anyone, is illegal.
Personally, I don't think that's gonna happen. There's way too many people making way too much money telling the government who hangs out with who, who cheats with who, and so on and so forth.
I might be good with legal guarantees, meaning jail time for those involved, that the only place images on these devices went was local to the municipality collecting them and that they were only accessed for very well defined reasons by very specific people.
The core issues are that aggregation and exfiltration of this data means that privacy is dead and the AI world allows analysis for almost no cost. We need an idea in our laws that puts back the limited scope that technology has removed. If the police have to expend one person's worth of time to listen to a wiretap then it really isn't possible to get out of control. We need that level of cost associated with ALPR and all surveillance so that the abuse of these systems doesn't get out of control. Make it appropriately hard and it won't be a problem.
Then the feds come in with a national security law and bypass all those state/local protections and slurp it all up into an AI-powered Palantir database, the very existence of which is classified. Suddenly you’re the victim of parallel construction and don’t even know it.
The database CANNOT EXIST SAFELY. Why don’t people who “might be okay with this IF…” understand that?
Collect the data and it WILL be misused, eventually, with 100% certainty. Has nobody read Snowden’s book? They even have a name for intel agents casually spying on their partners/crushes.
The law does not apply to everyone equally. The intelligence agencies get to break any laws they want without consequences, by longstanding tradition (remember 007’s “license to kill” or the CIA’s famous heart attack gun?). There are NO legal safeguards that can prevent abuse, no matter how you word them, because there will always be some animals who are “more equal than others” to whom they do not apply (“national security carve-out”, “LEO exception”, etc).
Sadly, those to whom they do not apply are now coordinating with the new wannabe SturmAbteilung in what are called “fusion centers”.
This is a good article about some of the legal particulars. https://www.heraldnet.com/2026/02/24/snohomish-county-judge-...
The defense of the photos not being government business until accessed seems shaky. That the physical camera installations were purposeful intentions to conduct government business in those areas is a reasonable line; this doesn't set precedent for Google's information becoming public records because the police might do a google search, to use an extreme example.
The proposed legislative amendment that would exclude Flock footage from public records (which would make this judgment moot) makes sense in the light of red light cameras already being excluded by the same legislators. However, I'd like to see a more incisive law covering both that would compel a reasonable amount of public insight into the footage.
The defense of the photos not being government business until accessed seems shaky.
It's reminiscent of the NSA's argument that data "collection" occurs only when a search is performed on existing "gathered" data. File under "Stuff that's only legal when the government does it."
My prediction: “It’s not a “search” when an AI looks at the stored database and does sentiment analysis, because an algorithm doesn’t violate your privacy. It’s only a “search” after it’s flagged and an actual human with human opinions sees your private chats criticizing the supreme leader.”
What should I be reading?
Scott Alexander has a decent article (or rather a guest blog post) at https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/all-lawful-use-much-more-th... that brings up the subject in the context of Anthropic and OpenAI's dealings with the Department of War (sic), and how their contracts with the DoW might be interpreted with regard to mass surveillance of Americans.
Worth checking out. I'm not personally knowledgeable enough to vouch for the veracity, though.
URL is 404'ing. Another article..
> Cameras that automatically capture images of vehicle license plates are being turned off by police in jurisdictions across Washington state, in part after a court ruled the public has a right to access data generated by the technology.
https://www.geekwire.com/2025/washington-state-cities-turn-o...
Awesome. I think I'll put in an open records request for the cameras down the street in my little Wisconsin town. See what happens
Funny I was thinking of doing that in my little Wisconsin town too. Howdy sorta neighborish HN user.
Wonder if we should coordinate doing it simultaneously in like 10,000 cities and towns?
Somewhat related discussion on Redmond Washington & Flock cameras: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45879101
The link is broken. Here is a working one. https://www.king5.com/article/news/community/facing-race/was...
Anyone can tell, why were those cameras installed in first place? Some company just said "lol for the fun" or what? Who paid for them?
A mix of public (city councils) and private (think HOAs that then donated access/equipment to the city) contracted with Flock in the past few years. The questions of exactly who, when, and why, are very muddy especially with the HOAs who operate rather privately.
The above link 404's for me, but https://www.wltx.com/article/news/nation-world/281-53d8693e-... works.
Does them removing it simply because it’s public record imply that they were up to no good?
They're not removing cameras.
> For now, Everett’s Flock camera network remains offline, as the debate over transparency, privacy and public safety continues in the Legislature. The bill in Olympia that would put guidelines on Flock's data has passed in the Senate.
Well if they had nothing to hide... /s
> “We were very disappointed,” Franklin said. “That means perpetrators of crime, people who are maybe engaged in domestic abuse or stalkers, they can request footage and that could cause a lot of harm.”
No concern over the dozens (or hundreds?) of cases of police or government employees themselves doing exactly what they’re afraid of here. Strange.
While I agree with the risks of DA/stalkers getting that data, this data is not known for being well protected against LoveInt. Quite the opposite it is usually sold on grey markets.
Or for what can already be purchased from a data broker on the open market.
"The masses/general populace are the enemy" - once you understand that this is the fundamental belief at the root of the elites behaviour, everything will make sense. Flock cameras and AI surveillance is designed to reign in 'the enemy'.
According to the article, the Flock cameras are still in place but are "offline".
Why does that not convince me?
Are there cameras pointed at the offline Flock cameras? I sure hope so because it would be a shame if they disappeared...
This appears to be an informative link;
https://www.everettpost.com/local-news/everett-temporarily-s...
Great now let’s follow suit in all 50 states.
Red states have zero crime, so they don't need them in the first place. /s
This isn’t a red/blue issue.
Flock is no more populate on the right than it is on the Left.