Police Can No Longer Ping Ring
If you’re a homeowner — especially if you’re a millennial (congrats, by the way)—you probably already use or at least have considered the service Ring. After all, who doesn’t want to protect their beloved property by taking Beyonce’s advice?
The popular home security company is owned by Amazon and offers a variety of indoor and outdoor cameras that connect to your smartphone. The Ring app allows you to remotely monitor your property, see who's there, and even talk to them through two-way audio. Their cameras boast features like motion detection, night vision, and optional siren alarms, all accessible through their user-friendly app. Moreover, the newer Ring is a cheaper and more convenient alternative to many older, more traditional competitors. Seems like a no-brainer, right?
But of course, there’s a snag. Ring has recently come under fire due to partnerships with law enforcement agencies that granted them unrestricted access to user camera footage, sparking privacy concerns. Let’s talk about the growing issues with Ring’s practice and the company’s recent decision to discontinue police access to user footage without a warrant.
Good Neighbors
In 2017, Ring launched a platform called “Neighbors” with the stated intention of “connecting communities.” Neighbors app connects Ring users with their Ring user neighbors to share crime and safety info within their local area. You get alerts about incidents near you, can post your own concerns, and interact anonymously with neighbors to build a safer community. On its blog, the Ring wrote that it has “helped reunite more than three hundred thousand missing pets with their owners and helped families locate more than five thousand missing family members.”
The company claims that “During Hurricane Ian, more than 45,000 local residents took to the Neighbors app to make donations, share shelter locations, and ask for help.” Eric Kuhn, the Head of Neighbors, shared that his “own family experienced the power of hyper-local community when we were evacuated during the Woolsey Fire in 2018” and his neighborhood “used the Neighbors app to update each other about block-to-block conditions, and offer each other help and assistance.”
The 'Request for Assistance' Tool
But two weeks ago, while lauding the platform as a success, Kuhn simultaneously announced that the company was making “some changes to the Neighbors app based on what we’ve heard from our customers.” A major change was sunsetting the Request for Assistance (RFA) tool.
RFA was designed to help law enforcement gather video footage from Ring devices relevant to ongoing investigations. Police officers could submit a request within the Ring Neighbors app, specifying a time range and area related to their investigation. The request would only target Ring devices within the specified area and timeframe.
Ring users within the targeted area would receive a notification about the police request. They could then choose one of the following options: share relevant video footage directly with law enforcement; decline the request and keep their footage private; or contact Ring for more information. Participation in RFA was voluntary for Ring users. They had the complete right to decline to share footage.
Ring emphasized that only public safety situations justified RFA requests, not for general surveillance. Nonetheless, the tool faced a good deal of criticism. The controversy surrounding Ring's releasing footage to police was multifaceted.
Problems with Privacy and Profiling
Privacy concerns were an obvious issue. Ring initially allowed police to directly email users for footage, bypassing warrants and potentially coercing them into sharing. Critics argued that Ring's practices undermined the warrant process, allowing police to access footage without proper judicial oversight.
Concerns existed about Ring's internal criteria for determining "emergency" situations and the lack of transparency in their decision-making. In some cases, Ring provided footage without user knowledge or consent, even for non-emergency situations. Concerns grew about Ring creating a vast, interconnected surveillance network, potentially infringing on individuals' privacy and freedom of movement.
But the concerns went further, encompassing potential for racial profiling and police overreach. Critics argued that police might disproportionately target minority communities for footage requests, exacerbating existing racial profiling issues. In addition, instances of Ring footage being used against Black Lives Matter protests raised concerns about chilling the right to protest and free speech.
Ring Rolls RFA Back
These concerns led to public outcry, investigations, and ultimately, Ring's decision to discontinue providing footage to police without user consent and a warrant. Police can still request footage from Ring users, but it now requires a warrant or user consent. Kuhn also noted: “Public safety agencies like fire and police departments can still use the Neighbors app to share helpful safety tips, updates, and community events … Public safety agency posts are still public, and will be available for users to view on the Neighbors app feed and on the agency's profile.”
While there might have been a solid Constitutional issue under the Fourth Amendment under its previous RFA practices, the company seems to have a solid legal team nipping the potential search and seizure lawsuits in the bud. Meanwhile, the debate continues around the broader implications of widespread surveillance technology and its potential impact on privacy and civil liberties.
Related Resources:
- Is It Legal to Record People at a Gym? (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
- Can Employers Use Video Cameras to Monitor Workers? (FindLaw's Learn About the Law)
- Can Home Security System Companies Be Liable for Injuries? (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)