Lawmakers Vote on Paris Olympic Law with Surveillance Fears

The Olympics Paris 2024 official mascot "Phryge" displays at the construction site of the athletes' village of the Paris 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Saint-Ouen, north of Paris, France, 24 March 2023. (EPA)
The Olympics Paris 2024 official mascot "Phryge" displays at the construction site of the athletes' village of the Paris 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Saint-Ouen, north of Paris, France, 24 March 2023. (EPA)
TT

Lawmakers Vote on Paris Olympic Law with Surveillance Fears

The Olympics Paris 2024 official mascot "Phryge" displays at the construction site of the athletes' village of the Paris 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Saint-Ouen, north of Paris, France, 24 March 2023. (EPA)
The Olympics Paris 2024 official mascot "Phryge" displays at the construction site of the athletes' village of the Paris 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Saint-Ouen, north of Paris, France, 24 March 2023. (EPA)

A proposed French law for the 2024 Paris Olympics that critics contend will open the door for privacy-busting video surveillance technology in France and elsewhere in Europe faces an important hurdle on Tuesday with lawmakers set to vote on it.

The bill would legalize the temporary use of so-called intelligent surveillance systems to safeguard the Paris Games, which run next year from July 26-Aug. 11, and the Paralympics that follow. The systems combine cameras with artificial intelligence software to flag potential security concerns, such as abandoned packages or crowd surges. Human operators would decide whether action is needed.

French authorities insist the surveillance wouldn't involve facial recognition. Supporters of the bill argue that the technology could help avert disasters like the deadly crowd crush that killed nearly 160 people during Halloween festivities in South Korea in October.

“It’s not about recognizing ‘Mr. X’ in a crowd,” Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin told National Assembly lawmakers last week when they were debating the measures. “It’s about recognizing situations.”

The Senate overwhelmingly approved the draft in January, by 245 votes to 28. If the National Assembly follows suit Tuesday afternoon, the bill is slated for further fine-tuning by assembly members and senators before its final adoption, expected in April.

Digital rights watchdog groups argue that France will violate international human rights law by becoming the first of the European Union’s 27 countries to legalize AI-powered surveillance, even if just temporarily. The bill says the technology can be used on an experimental basis to the end of 2024 to safeguard sporting and cultural events in France that are particularly at risk of being targeted by terror attacks.

The technology’s use “risks permanently transforming France into a dystopian surveillance state” and “will lead to an all-out assault on the rights to privacy, protest, and freedom of assembly and expression,” said Mher Hakobyan, an Amnesty International adviser on AI regulation.

“It has also been well-documented that hostile surveillance technologies are disproportionately used to target marginalized groups, including migrants and Black and brown people,” Hakobyan added.

Even though the draft law says the cameras won't use facial recognition, they are still liable to scrutinize physical traits including people's postures, walks and gestures, critics contend. Opponents also are concerned that the technology risks zeroing-in on people who spend a lot of time in public spaces, such as the homeless. The bill also clears the way for the technology's use with cameras mounted on drones.

During last week’s National Assembly discussions on the bill, opposition lawmaker Sandra Regol argued that it would turn Olympic visitors into “guinea pigs” for AI-powered surveillance.



US Supreme Court Tosses Case Involving Securities Fraud Suit against Facebook

A 3D-printed Facebook logo is seen in front of a displayed stock graph. (Reuters)
A 3D-printed Facebook logo is seen in front of a displayed stock graph. (Reuters)
TT

US Supreme Court Tosses Case Involving Securities Fraud Suit against Facebook

A 3D-printed Facebook logo is seen in front of a displayed stock graph. (Reuters)
A 3D-printed Facebook logo is seen in front of a displayed stock graph. (Reuters)

The US Supreme Court sidestepped on Friday a decision on whether to allow shareholders to proceed with a securities fraud lawsuit accusing Meta's Facebook of misleading investors about the misuse of the social media platform's user data.
The justices, who heard arguments in the case on Nov. 6, dismissed Facebook's appeal of a lower court's ruling that had allowed a 2018 class action led by Amalgamated Bank to proceed. The Supreme Court opted not resolve the underlying legal dispute, determining that the case should not have been taken up. Its action leaves the lower court's decision in place, Reuters reported. 
The court's dismissal came in a one-line order that provided no explanation. The Facebook dispute was one of two cases to come before the Supreme Court this month involving the right of private litigants to hold companies to account for alleged securities fraud. The other one, involving the artificial intelligence chipmaker Nvidia, was argued on Nov. 13. The Supreme Court has not ruled yet in the Nvidia case.
The plaintiffs in the Facebook case claimed the company unlawfully withheld information from investors about a 2015 data breach involving British political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica that affected more than 30 million Facebook users. They accused Facebook of misleading investors in violation of the Securities Exchange Act, a 1934 federal law that requires publicly traded companies to disclose their business risks. Facebook's stock fell following 2018 media reports that Cambridge Analytica had used improperly harvested Facebook user data in connection with Donald Trump's successful US presidential campaign in 2016. The investors have sought unspecified monetary damages in part to recoup the lost value of the Facebook stock they held.
At issue was whether Facebook broke the law when it failed to detail the prior data breach in subsequent business-risk disclosures, and instead portrayed the risk of such incidents as purely hypothetical.
Facebook argued that it was not required to reveal that its warned-of risk had already materialized because "a reasonable investor" would understand risk disclosures to be forward-looking statements. President Joe Biden's administration supported the shareholders in the case.
US District Judge Edward Davila dismissed the lawsuit but the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals revived it.
The Cambridge Analytica data breach prompted US government investigations into Facebook's privacy practices, various lawsuits and a US congressional hearing. The US Securities and Exchange Commission in 2019 brought an enforcement action against Facebook over the matter, which the company settled for $100 million. Facebook paid a separate $5 billion penalty to the US Federal Trade Commission over the issue.
The Supreme Court in prior rulings has limited the authority of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the federal agency that polices securities fraud.