Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
There is a security company also involved in the lawsuit (Security Industry Specialists), so it's possible that security footage captured in Apple retail stores is analyzed after the fact by this company.
This is much, much more likely...I seriously doubt Apple handles their own security, every store pretty much uses a security service, so Apple may only have a part in things, in fact I would think this hangs more on the security company than Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gasu E.
This is much, much more likely...I seriously doubt Apple handles their own security, every store pretty much uses a security service, so Apple may only have a part in things, in fact I would think this hangs more on the security company than Apple.

Unfortunately for Apple, the security company's mistakes may lead to a large settlement for Bah. They shouldn't rely so much on an outside company doing things correctly. They must have oversight and make necessary changes.
 
That’s the world we live in, in today’s age of when someone feels they’re ‘entitled’ to money due to legalities where they have been ‘subjected to severe stress and hardships’ as the article indicates , they will reach for the highest number possible, even if they’re not rewarded that, in the end, it’s all about the money versus the real reason why they are suing.
I agree totally with your realistic response. But to be precise, it’s the USA ‘we’ live in. I live in another part of our world, in the UK, where the pushback is underway in the argument between entitlement, justice and common sense. For example, ludicrous sums involved in compensation awards would cripple the NHS if this USA phenomena had been allowed to prevail. 1 billion dollars has nothing to do with justice it simply reflects the reality that lawyers are in control in the USA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PlayUltimate
Interesting that a company which warns against the technological abuses of privacy, uses the same tool as the Chinese government.

Oh... no need to go to China or did you think that the US government and many other governments don't use such 'technological abuses of privacy'...?
 
No one is supposed to get rich with damages. Or the company get poor.

1 billion is way too much for any human being on Earth. And is a good amount of Apple's revenue. No way.

Asking for a public apology and about $100 million would suffice. Still a little bit too much, but you can't replace the days/hours he was detained. Apple, of course, is lying in this article about its store faceID and does not feel ashamed for doing so.
[doublepost=1556103153][/doublepost]
Unfortunately for Apple, the security company's mistakes may lead to a large settlement for Bah. They shouldn't rely so much on an outside company doing things correctly. They must have oversight and make necessary changes.

That's why I avoid going to physical stores. There's no need to go to an Apple Store nowadays, unless strictly necessary.

I remember once going to a Apple Store and the staff did not even notice me (it was not full). Not a bad thing, but for a company that praises its customers....well, the worst experience ever. I was going to buy a product. I don't know what they thought, maybe that I did not have enough money, well...just not going there ever again. New York City stores in particular I never go again. They refused to address my Macbook Pro that came with a significant dent. If you bought such an expensive product like a Ferrari you expect to be perfect, not with minor defects that doesn't affect the products, but are still there. They market their products like luxury, but some stores are just as bad as regular ones.
 
Last edited:
Yep let’s berate him for losing his license. The issue here isn’t that he was arrested and falsely accused of a crime he didn’t commit. Let’s blame the victim.

Just because he is the "victim" doesn't mean he did nothing wrong. That is a false notion that the internet has grabbed onto. He should have reported his ID as stolen. That is his responsibility. I am confused as to why his ID, even a learners permit did not have a photo on it. Where I live they do.
 
Target, Wal-Mart, Casinos - they all use real time facial recognition to know who is entering their buildings. They don't all have to know exactly who you are but they can compare faces of people entering their doors to an "undesirables" list of people who have been caught stealing / cheating in the past so security officers can be alerted to that person's presence.

This story makes a lot of assertions about Apple Stores without a lot of facts / details. I have no doubt Apple has security cameras recording everything that happens in their stores in case of theft or staged "slip & fall" lawsuits. I doubt that Apple is using facial recognition in real-time but if they record someone stealing from a store I would not blame them at all for giving that video to a company to try to identify the person in the video. I hope there will be an update to this story that clarifies exactly what happened and what Apple's store policies are.
 
There may be a disconnect between Apple and their security partner. Bah's lawyers (including the first from his arraignment in the Boston case) were told info that contradicts Apple's statement about facial recognition tech. Point 22 from the lawsuit:

"At that point, Detective Reinhold also explained that Defendant’s security technology
identifies suspects of theft using facial recognition technology."


The lawyers would be careful to not make intentionally misleading statements in a court filing. There would serious repercussions and any untrue statements would be fatal to a suit.

Truthful statements can also be fatal to a suit.

Detective Reinhold, sorry to say, doesn't actually have any clue what "Defendant's security technology" does. This statement is plain and simple hearsay. Doesn't count. Means nothing. And since the thief looks nothing like Bah, it seems extremely unlikely that any security technology has identified him based on security footage of a person looking totally different.

What may have happened, is that there is a thief stealing many items, including Bah's "learner's permit without a photograph", and various items at Apple Stores. And that he was caught on surveillance camera, AND somehow lost that learner's permit. So at this point Apple had photos, and a learner's permit dropped by the thief.

It is then totally normal to hand this to the police, who go and arrest the owner of the learner's permit. Now I don't know why they had to make that arrest at 4am, and I don't know why it took them more than ten seconds to see that the owner of the learner's permit was not the person from the security footage, but in that situation, the arrest itself was quite normal, and legitimate, and just bad luck.

They apprehended someone and didn't have him provide an actual photo ID. He didn't match the info contained on the interim Learner's Permit. The NYPD clearly says that Bah didn't match either the photo provided for the arrest warrant or the individual in the video of the NYC Apple store theft. This is all on Apple.

Apple didn't apprehend anyone. Bah _did_ match the info on the interim Learner's Permit, because it was his, lost or stolen from him. And Bah _did not_ match the photo of the thief. Bah was a very likely suspect, because his Learner's Permit was found at the crime scene. Why the police didn't look at his face, looked at the photo with the arrest warrant, and conclude that they are not the same, nobody knows. The "facial recognition" story is bunk. Or would you care to explain why facial recognition software would out of 300 million Americans identify one who looks nothing like the picture?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: realtuner
Suing for 1 billion is a severe attempt at grasping for desperation, that’s not even a feasible amount of money that would logically be paid out from a company like Apple in this situation, given we don’t even know all the facts either. If the subject wants to sue, I never contested that he shouldn’t, (Which I have no idea why you’re asking me what else can he do), the point is, it’s all about the money versus the actual principle behind the matter. Because no one, and I mean no one, sues for $1 billion. That’s absurd, _if_ it even makes it to trial.



But it didn’t happen to me, so I’m not going to project anything other than discussing the article itself. The reality is, if the defendant wants to sue, so be it, but throwing around a number like 1 billion is comical, and I am fairly confident that number will not be reached in this specific case. If Apple is in the wrong, then they will be held accountable for it.


You're getting hung up on the dollar figure, which essentially means nothing. It's an old trick that lawyers have employed for years... Throw out a ridiculously high number, obviously knowing the lawsuit is not worth anywhere near that or that the defendant won't get that much... But it generates headlines (especially when a big popular name brand is involved) and more importantly it shapes the mind frame of the jury should it come to that. So don't get hung up on the actual number as it means nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marekul
Your response is laughable. If Apple had used common sense, Bah would not have been harmed. They provided horrible information to the police/DA. I'm "trying really hard to make Apples [sic] involvement far more than it is"?! That statement totally lacks logic. RTF complaint. They apprehended someone and didn't have him provide an actual photo ID. He didn't match the info contained on the interim Learner's Permit. The NYPD clearly says that Bah didn't match either the photo provided for the arrest warrant or the individual in the video of the NYC Apple store theft. This is all on Apple.

Your understanding of the law and how the DA/police operate is what’s laughable.
 
His complaint is unlikely to withstand scrutiny. One basic problem is that he cites both Apple and SIS as defendants in the caption, but then uses "Defendant" to refer solely to Apple. If I were SIS, I would immediately move to dismiss on this basis alone. This defect also is of use to Apple, because much of the alleged conduct is not that of Apple, but rather of SIS. In short, this plaintiff appears to be playing games.

It gets worse. The complaint devotes considerable attention to attacking Face ID in Apple's *devices*. When it then turns to the actual incident, it more blandly discusses security footage (i.e., not necessarily facial recognition itself). The complaint does try to link Face ID to the incident by citing a police detective's purported (and most likely inadmissible) statement that Apple uses facial recognition in stores, but qualifies this heavily by discussing what Apple "presumably" does to identify potential suspects from security footage. Yes, it actually uses the word "presumably" to describe Apple's purported use of facial recognition technology in this case.

Even worse, the complaint refers to a particular SIS employee who purportedly identified plaintiff from "security cameras" because the employee told police "he knew" plaintiff from thefts at other stores. This appears to contradict the narrative that plaintiff was identified by facial recognition technology. Oops.

I could go on, but you get the idea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ravenstar
Suing for $1 billion = he and his lawyer see deep pockets and they are gunning for a settlement.

I hope Apple fights this tooth and nail and beats him. Once that's done, they need to ban him from all of their stores permanently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: emceegrath
Obviously we don’t know if this was the police departments fault or Apple’s. However if I was falsely accused of a crime and arrested I would be extremely upset.
Would you be ridiculous enough to try to sue for $1,000,000,000 because of “severe stress and hardship”?

He’s obviously just trying to find a way to take advantage of one of the world’s wealthiest companies at this point.

Kid’s a snowflake.
 
Would you be ridiculous enough to try to sue for $1,000,000,000 because of “severe stress and hardship”?

He’s obviously just trying to find a way to take advantage of one of the world’s wealthiest companies at this point.

Kid’s a snowflake.
I wouldn't sue at all because where I live suing isn't very common. However maybe if I lived in America and litigation was common place, maybe I would.
 
From the Bloomberg article:

Apple said on Tuesday it doesn’t use facial recognition in its stores.
He’s also saying they got his name from an ID that didn’t have a photo. There are pieces to the process that haven’t been made clear.

And he doesn’t say they identify everyone. I fully expect that they have a security system installed— running recognition on that after a theft is legit. I’d actually rather it be Apple running that than some government agency running it through an Amazon service.

It looks to me like he’s going for the deepest pockets first.
[doublepost=1556036609][/doublepost]
I disagree on both points. I don’t see Apples fault— they were robbed. I also think the kid is right to be pissed if he was misidentified and is an innocent person having their life disrupted this way.

The Police should be the intermediary here. It doesn’t sound like Apple ran any facial recognition software, and even if they did the police should be taking those results on faith. It doesn’t sound like they did— it sounds like they tracked his name, not his picture.

Mistakes happen. That doesn’t always mean someone is flawed.
Would you be ridiculous enough to try to sue for $1,000,000,000 because of “severe stress and hardship”?

He’s obviously just trying to find a way to take advantage of one of the world’s wealthiest companies at this point.

Kid’s a snowflake.

Just as you said, mistakes happen, and sometimes human beings need to grow a pair and just get over it cuz, ya know, mistakes happen.
 
Sues for $1B, gets a $50 iTunes card.
And...

W1_w9y.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoXoM and bruinsrme
I wouldn't sue at all because where I live suing isn't very common. However maybe if I lived in America and litigation was common place, maybe I would.
Well I do live in America, and that kind of thinking is exactly what’s destroying my country.

“Well, everyone else does it... so guess I will too!”
 
First Apple doesn't use face recognition in their stores. Like every other store they use surveillance equipment. And at best you get a some what image of the person. Plus an employee must catch you red handed in order to be arrested.
Second the police would not bust down your door at 4 am to question you about stolen iPhones. They have more things to do than deal with that nonsense, just think of how many doors would be busted at 4 am because someone stole a phone.
Third This teen is a potential activist. He has a you tube channel and labels himself as a community leader. And God only knows his intentions for the US. Just my opinion, but I have yet to see an activist from another country do any good for the American people. Just saying.
So summary he is on a FBI watch list and was arrested and question about some activites he is involved in and decide to use it to sue a major company for bogus nonsense for an enormous amount of money to fund his activities. And I am sure his pigment of skin tone will be a major factor as well.
So there, no sense costing the taxpayers thousands of dollars on a fruitless lawsuit I just settle it in less than 5 minutes. You are welcome New York
 
Oh... no need to go to China or did you think that the US government and many other governments don't use such 'technological abuses of privacy'...?
In both the UK and PRC surveillance facial recognition enabled cameras are ubiquitous. Their purpose and deployment differ greatly. Simply having and deploying the technology does not necessarily mean it is being abused.
 
Think about it. He wasn't detained when the theft(s) occurred. He was detained when he visited a store after the fact. How did the store determine it was him and know when he was present?
Because his name and address are on the learner's permit?

The insane thing about this is Apple can't get the receipt printers at the register/Genius Bar to work most of the time, but people think they've invested millions into putting some kind of Skynet facial recognition system into their retail outlets? As opposed to... just using CCTV and asking for ID? Does that really make any kind of sense?

The kid thinks he can squeeze Apple for money and his lawyer's probably hoping they'll settle rather than divert lawyer hours to a court case. I guarantee both of them are full of it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.