A weird one via memeorandum from NBC 4 in New York: “Face Recognition Tech Gets Girl Scout Mom Booted From Rockettes Show — Due to Where She Works.”
A recent incident at Radio City Music Hall involving the mother of a Girl Scout is shedding light on the growing controversy of facial recognition, as critics claim it is being used to target perceived enemies — in this case, by one of the most famous companies in the country.
Kelly Conlon and her daughter came to New York City the weekend after Thanksgiving as part of a Girl Scout field trip to Radio City Music Hall to see the Christmas Spectacular show. But while her daughter, other members of the Girl Scout troop and their mothers got to go enjoy the show, Conlon wasn’t allowed to do so.
[…]
Conlon is an associate with the New Jersey based law firm, Davis, Saperstein and Solomon, which for years has been involved in personal injury litigation against a restaurant venue now under the umbrella of MSG Entertainment.
“I don’t practice in New York. I’m not an attorney that works on any cases against MSG,” said Conlon.
But MSG said she was banned nonetheless — along with fellow attorneys in that firm and others.
“MSG instituted a straightforward policy that precludes attorneys pursuing active litigation against the Company from attending events at our venues until that litigation has been resolved. While we understand this policy is disappointing to some, we cannot ignore the fact that litigation creates an inherently adverse environment. All impacted attorneys were notified of the policy, including Davis, Saperstein and Salomon, which was notified twice,” a spokesperson for MSG Entertainment said in a statement.
[…]
Davis is now upping the legal ante, challenging MSG’s license with the State Liquor Authority.
“The liquor license that MSG got requires them to admit members of the public, unless there are people who would be disruptive who constitute a security threat,” said Davis. “Taking a mother, separating a mother from her daughter and Girl Scouts she was watching over — and to do it under the pretext of protecting any disclosure of litigation information — is absolutely absurd. The fact they’re using facial recognition to do this is frightening. It’s un-American to do this.”
A spokesperson for MSG reiterated in a statement that safety is their highest priority and that facial recognition is just one of the methods they use. MSG Entertainment also said it is confident their policy is in compliance with all applicable laws, including the New York State Liquor Authority.
The technology is new enough that we likely don’t have much in the way of settled law. This would certainly seem to violate the spirit of public accommodation. Still, lawyers are not, so far as I’m aware, a protected class.
Unless there’s far more to the story than has been reported—a decided possibility—MSG’s policy makes no sense. Aside from the fact that Davis works for a huge firm and is not involved in the case against MSG, what is it that a lawyer would glean from watching a Rockettes performance that they couldn’t via ordinary discovery?
Beyond the specific case, should private companies even have access to this sort of technology? It seems inherently problematic. Indeed, most of the images I find looking to illustrate the post are of Chinese people, owing to the PRC’s extensive use of the technology as part of its “social credit” scheme.
