Mr. Noren is concerned, he said, that when he now goes to events at MSG venues, his face is still being tracked and his behavior closely monitored.
Woodrow Hartzog, a professor of law at Boston University, predicts that as more cases emerge involving companies that scan their customers’ faces, people will play “Whac-a-Mole,” seeking protection among old laws. Professor Hartzog said that facial recognition technology should be banned, because while it could be used beneficially, for example, to detect security threats, it would also, inevitably, be used in an objectionable way.
“A habitual bad ventilator can be detected almost instantly,” he said. “But in all worlds where that is true, it is also true that those in power can use facial recognition to detect anyone who criticizes or dislikes them, and so that power can be used indiscriminately against all of us.”
Alan Greenberg is a fan of Jerry Seinfeld. He also, through his firm Greenberg Law PC, represents a fan who sued Madison Square Garden after being assaulted at a Rangers game. That meant it could be difficult for him to attend a Seinfeld show at the Beacon Theatre, which is owned by MSG Entertainment. He sued, so he had a preliminary injunction in hand when he attended the show, but he also grew the beard to try to evade facial recognition.
Lawyers may not be the most understanding victims, and their need to be entertained may not be the most compelling cause. But their plight, Greenberg said, should raise alarm bells about how widespread use of this technology could be. Companies, for example, can turn people away based on their political beliefs, comments they’ve made online, or who they work for.
“Lawyers may not be the most favored class,” he said, “but it could expand to any other class of people.”
