295
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] Brown5500@sh.itjust.works 25 points 10 hours ago

At least 13 of the 53 jurisdictions that received a records request from Rodriguez have since canceled their Flock contracts or deactivated the cameras

A true patriot at work

[-] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 9 points 10 hours ago

So all he had to do was make a public records request for the images flock cameras took as he drove by, and they couldn’t produce the images?

[-] AlecSadler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 9 hours ago

Time to make some data requests to my local city then...

[-] jaybone@lemmy.zip 21 points 18 hours ago

So the local governments are paying for these lawsuits, not flock right?

[-] SayJess@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 18 hours ago

And who funds the local governments? Good for him, but Flock Safety is not hurt in the least.

[-] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 9 hours ago

this from @brown5500@sh.itjust.works :

At least 13 of the 53 jurisdictions that received a records request from Rodriguez have since canceled their Flock contracts or deactivated the cameras

[-] jaybone@lemmy.zip 10 points 17 hours ago

That’s my point. All of the residents are paying for this. Flock doesn’t give a fuck.

[-] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 9 hours ago

this from @brown5500@sh.itjust.works :

At least 13 of the 53 jurisdictions that received a records request from Rodriguez have since canceled their Flock contracts or deactivated the cameras

[-] jaybone@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 hours ago

Well a quarter isn’t bad I guess.

[-] HubertManne@piefed.social 0 points 9 hours ago

Yeah I guess the assumption is his action pushed them to it and theoretically if more and more people do it then more and more jurisdictions might be forced to cancel.

[-] Newsteinleo@infosec.pub 13 points 13 hours ago

But flock isn't the issue, the local governments are. It's the local government that puts up the camera and authorizes there use. If Flock went out of business some other company would fill that void, and flock does have competitors.

[-] jaybone@lemmy.zip 2 points 11 hours ago

Some might argue flock facilitates illegal access to the data and stored video. In which case it’s more about the backend service than the cameras themselves. But yeah other companies can do that too.

[-] SayJess@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 17 hours ago

Sorry, I was agreeing with you. Yes-and-ing.

[-] Zedstrian@sopuli.xyz 48 points 21 hours ago

Unless the viability of these lawsuits is a quirk of Washington freedom of information laws, this tactic should be expanded to more states.

[-] kersploosh@sh.itjust.works 34 points 20 hours ago

In Washington he managed to do this before his legal window of opportunity closed.

Washington state started regulating use of ALPRS by law enforcement this year. A new law that went into effect in March limits the use of ALPR data to investigate felonies and gross misdemeanors, exempts the data from public records requests and closes loopholes that could previously be exploited by immigration enforcement agencies outside the state.

[-] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 15 hours ago

So now they just didn't have to reveal the info....

this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2026
295 points (99.3% liked)

deflock.me

542 readers
429 users here now

Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) are AI-powered cameras that capture and analyze images of all passing vehicles, storing details like your car’s location, date, and time. They also capture your car’s make, model, color, and identifying features such as dents, roof racks, and bumper stickers, often turning these into searchable data points. These cameras collect data on millions of vehicles—regardless of whether the driver is suspected of a crime. While these systems can be useful for tracking stolen cars or wanted individuals, they are mostly used to track the movements of innocent people.

Learn more at deflock.me

founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS