Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New York Student Sues Apple for False Arrest After Being Mistakenly Identified as Store Thief [Updated]

rtomyj said:
How do you think face recognition violates your privacy when you’re in a public space / in someone’s property?
Click to expand...

Personally, I think it's legit to surveil people under those circumstances. But if it happens that Apple is using such tools, the issue is their integrity.

Interestingly, your argument rightly excuses the monitoring that occurs while visiting a public website. Privacy seekers think their personal space has been violated when, in fact, they are utilizing a public utility and visiting a virtual property outside their own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iSilas
BasicGreatGuy said:
As Relentless noted, Apple cannot arrest anyone. They can, if policy allows, detain someone, until the proper authorities arrive.

Since the article states he was arrested, that leads me to believe that the police (along with the DA) believed there was sufficient probable cause (and evidence) for arrest.

Unless Bah can show Apple was negligent in its security process, I don't see him winning.
Click to expand...

He was arrested at his home in New York and the crime happened in Boston. Store employees can only detain someone during an actual crime (as in they catch someone stealing in the store and hold the person until police arrive). Employees can’t go “arresting” people after the fact. And based on how easy it is to steal from Apple stores I’m pretty sure Apples official policy is not to risk your safety trying to “arrest” someone. Just like stores tell you to hand over money to an armed robber instead of trying to be a hero and possibly getting shot.

Therefore it was obviously the police that arrested Bah, so if he has a problem with his arrest he should be going after them.

We have facial recognition cameras at work and all over our building exterior. However, the way they are used is a little different. If I’m in our building after hours (or in the compound outside) I will sometimes get an audible warning to look at the camera. It will recognize my face and the alarm won’t trip because I’m an employee. If it doesn’t recognize my face it can ask me to hold up my ID (the camera has enough resolution and zoom to read my ID card). It can also spot suspicious activity. Walking through the compound won’t trigger anything because it’s normal. But if I stop and duck down behind a car or crawl on the ground it will trigger because that’s considered suspicious.

The first night after we had it installed the police caught 3 different people trespassing in the compound looking for unlocked cars.

Apple obviously has security cameras. They might have facial recognition for employees or systems similar to our to record suspicious activity. But I doubt Apple is building a profile of people in their stores based on facial recognition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohio.emt, PlayUltimate, willmtaylor and 1 other person
Modernboy said:
I agree it’s very odd, but it’s difficult not to roll my eyes at someone suing for “anguish” in a situation like this.
Click to expand...
Modernboy said:
I agree it’s very odd, but it’s difficult not to roll my eyes at someone suing for “anguish” in a situation like this.
Click to expand...

Difficult yes I agree, especially for $1 billion dollars.

Some things in perspective:
His ID was stolen (no photo).
Apple or the security company (we’re not sure whom), used facial photo to suit recognize or used to have him charged.
This kid is still a kid and was nowhere near the seven of this crime(a) ~ I’m not sure the alibi is iron clad for all the crimes he was charged for yet consider:
The shame he’s received.
The criminal record and fingerprint in a database no has him “marked”
Potential career path or any well paying jobs (Bank, investment firms, government, dental, legal, property industry, and security) are NO LONGER a viable option to him! Meaning low income wages higher percentage of debt for college for the next 1yr+ due to the question “have you ever been charged or convicted of a crime for which you’ve not been pardoned or expunged?!” (At least in Canada that’s the official question, I’m sure there is an equivalent in the USA).
Peers may have already shunned him,
What if his family is of a culture where choosing a life mate is no in disarray and this family is shamed within their culture?

There is a lot of “potentials” to consider outside of our understanding or knowledge for this $1 billion lawsuit. How long after being acquitted of all charges can he then proceed to have his records sealed, inadmissible to any future crimes or fully purged (let’s be honest their never really purged nor sealed fully; u get my drift here)? I’m sure he has to pay for a lawye, affidavit, etc to begin this process - Apple nor the security company will that’s for certain.

Most importantly did a damn photo was good enough to charge him? Like seriously? No real investigation was done at all?

“1984” (Orson) seems like its 2019!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: iSilas, ronntaylor and jagolden
Apparently some of you don't understand how law suits for this type of thing work.... You sue for a crazy amount thus guaranteeing a settlement much higher than if you had sued for a specific amount.#ambulancechasing101
 
techfreak23 said:
Okay he’s not wrong for suing, but $1 billion? That’s a bit of a stretch...
Click to expand...

Yes, he is. You’re defending trying to hold people liable for actually using law enforcement to investigate a crime.
[doublepost=1555991738][/doublepost]
BasicGreatGuy said:
If it is found there was no criminal intent with wrong information being given to law enforcement, said person(s) can still face civil action by the aggrieved party.
Click to expand...

What wrong information? “Here is our store video and here is the document that was used for the theft.”? Apple didn’t identify any specific person. They handed it off to police and a judge clearly thought there was enough to go through standard process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PickUrPoison
macfacts said:
A lot of us are wondering if this story is true. That's how bad apples reputation is now.
Click to expand...

Nobody is wondering anything. Don’t assume others believe/fall for your ridiculous anti-Apple lies you always post.

The police arrested him. They’re the ones (along with a DA) who make the decision that the evidence is sufficient to arrest him. He should be suing the police, not Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohio.emt, willmtaylor, mw360 and 2 others
Jimmy Bubbles said:
Well, do you think that it is coincidence that they use a facial recognition software in their stores along with our iPhones?
Click to expand...
Well, continuing with our answering a question with a question; the stores have video cameras, does that have relevance to whether our iPhone video is or is not secure? But to answer your question, yes I think it’s just a coincidence.
 
Last edited:
$1 billion in Bitcoin please. You gotta have a really good case to put $1billion as claim. Apple tried suing Qualcomm for $1billion, but lost.
 
Defthand said:
Personally, I think it's legit to surveil people under those circumstances. But if it happens that Apple is using such tools, the issue is their integrity.

Interestingly, your argument rightly excuses the monitoring that occurs while visiting a public website. Privacy seekers think their personal space has been violated when, in fact, they are utilizing a public utility and visiting a virtual property outside their own.
Click to expand...

I mean, not really. Online I can go to a website that doesn’t hog MY resources. IE, ram when rendering ads and caching content, CPU when determining campaigns, etc. Companies using video surveillance want to protect their property and I don’t lose anything. No, not even privacy. You can’t be simultaneously in public and be private. Anonymous yes, private no. That makes no sense.

Let’s not kid ourselves and think Google is protecting their property by mining your data.

Also, online I have the option of not being tracked. Do you know a single store that doesn’t have surveillance? If you were a property owner wouldn’t you want face recognition to ID people before confrontation or loss?

Now don’t get me wrong. There is a clear distinction between a video feed as evidence of a crime and the government monitoring civilians. I also do think face recognition software is a tricky beast. But stores have been doing this thing before software. I know a store that monitors their premises and if a known shoplifter is within the strip mall, security knows.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PlayUltimate
Relentless Power said:
Apple hasn’t commented, but that is interesting that the article indicates that. If there’s any validity behind that they actually do use some type of ‘in-store facial recognition’, (Which I’m sort of doubtful), you think Apple would disclose that or in the least, it would be known that are using that type of method.
Click to expand...
If it proves to be true, in light of their strongly touted position on privacy, I think it would cause a big backlash. But I’m also doubtful. As of now it’s just one guy’s claim.
 
I love how people still think Apple as this company that respects our privacy. You think they implemented Face ID for your convenience and security? Lol. This company has one of the biggest scams going. It's called the ecosystem. And now they want to monitor your spending habits with their new credit card? Why not just give them the key to your house? This company creeps me out the more I look at them with open eyes. I'm ticked I blindly defended this company for years like the sheep that I was, but no more. I'm glad I'm out, and I'm glad I was never completely all in to begin with. Corporate greed has alway been around, but Apple is way beyond the norm. Sorta like how all politicians lie, but there is one that takes lies to a whole new level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iSilas and Kiorr
You need to identify yourself with a photo in an Apple Store??? I was a few times in my local store and NEVER did I need to show a photo or something. So this must either be a US thing or this man is talking ********.:confused:
 
Zito Abroad said:
I love how people still think Apple as this company that respects our privacy. You think they implemented Face ID for your convenience and security? Lol. This company has one of the biggest scams going. It's called the ecosystem. And now they want to monitor your spending habits with their new credit card? Why not just give them the key to your house? This company creeps me out the more I look at them with open eyes. I'm ticked I blindly defended this company for years like the sheep that I was, but no more. I'm glad I'm out, and I'm glad I was never completely all in to begin with. Corporate greed has alway been around, but Apple is way beyond the norm. Sorta like how all politicians lie, but there is one that takes lies to a whole new level.
Click to expand...

Good rant brah, Except that the Face ID data is stored only on and never leaves your phone.

Also, Apple gets none of your spending info from their card. Goldman gets some of it but can’t use it for anything but managing the card business.

What’s your hidden agenda in spreading untruths here?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveRivera, keysofanxiety and willmtaylor
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back