Student sues Apple for $1 billion over false arrest linked to facial recognition tech

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 56
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,516member
    sflocal said:
    Kid’s gonna lose anyway.  I want to know more about this facial recognition stuff.  Is Apple using this on people that enter their stores?  

    Are we talking “Minority Report”?
    I don't know why the AI article didn't bring this from the original article, but here it is:

    "Apple said on Tuesday it doesn’t use facial recognition in its stores."

    Very helpful. Thanks!
  • Reply 42 of 56
    macguimacgui Posts: 2,260member
    First: Does Apple have facial rec software and are they using it in their stores? Some of you believe this and I don't understand why. God I hope you never had to serve on a jury were factual evidence needs to be considered.

    Second, it's up to the police to examine evidence and pesent  it to the DA's office who judges whether it meets the standards to issue a warrant.

    Even if Apple used facial rec and it was crappy facial rec, it's not Apple making the charge or arrest.

    Anybody who thinks this kid is going to get any money from apps is an idiot. Getting money from NYPD is a different story. 

    You investigate before you snatch somebody up. It sounds like no ID whatsoever was made. 

    Of course as actual factual information is known, more accurate conclusions, guesses, and prognostications can be made. Until then it's all base speculation.

    I'm continued to be amazed at the number of people who ignore what information is provided and say 'Apple should give him money'. Apple is wrong because Apple is Apple seems to be the culmination of their critical thinking.

    What maroons.
    DAalseth
  • Reply 43 of 56
    macguimacgui Posts: 2,260member
    macxpress said:
    JWSC said:
    macxpress said:
    $1 Billion? BAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! He'll be lucky to get $1 Million. Shit, he'll be lucky to get $100,000. 
    Well, he’ll likely get something.  $1 billion?  Of course not.  But I’m sure he’ll be able to find good uses for $100,000, minus lawyer’s fees of course.

    I wouldn't be surprised if he gets absolutely nothing over this. This is just someone who knows Apple has over $270 Billion and thinks somehow they now deserve some of it because of a mistake. 
    I would be absolutely surprised if he got a dime from Apple. And extremely disappointed in Apple. But I don't think they'll do anything to encourage nuisance suits, unlike some of the posters here who want something for nothing.

    Depending one what this kid when through, he could well have the basis for a lawsuit, but as it stands, it's not for Apple to pay anything. 

    Unless Apple were to lose this lawsuit somehow, this story will slip to the back pages and we'll never know what happened and how it was disposed.
  • Reply 44 of 56
    1348513485 Posts: 250member
    davidw said:

    Here, even if Apple or the security company made a mistake in identifying this victim, it's yet to be proven and maybe can not be proven, that Apple or the security company was negligent or acted out of malice, when they mistakenly identified him as the suspect. But AFAIK, the victim was never charged with any crimes.  

    Even then, the crazy part of this suit is the $1B.

    That's it in a nutshell. You can't sue someone for an imperfect identification of a suspect. It's always subject to the official investigation, which is not Apple's fault.
  • Reply 45 of 56
    ronnronn Posts: 567member
    From reading several articles online, Apple is totally at fault here. They busted someone in one of their Boston stores possessing an interim Learner's Permit without a photo (which on its face states "not meant for identification purposes"). Then associated that person (using Bah’s name, address and other personal information) with three additional thefts in stores in Delaware, New Jersey and New York City. They sent that info to the NYPD to have Bah arrested. Bah was released once the NYPD saw that the person in Apple’s surveillance video (from the Manhattan store theft) clearly wasn’t Bah.

    So besides being arrested at home at 4 am, he had cases against him in four states. He had to hire a lawyer and attend an arraignment hearing in Boston although he lives and goes to school in New York.  All cases have been dropped except the case in New Jersey which he still has to resolve thanks to Apple’s negligence. His initial lawyer asked for all alleged surveillance video and allegations of thefts to resolve the misidentification in late June, 2018 -- several months before the NYC arrest -- but Apple and its co-defendant denied having any video and did not disclose additional allegations of thefts. The affidavit for the NYC arrest included a photo from Apple of someone clearly not Bah.  

    Asking for $1 Billion wasn't foolish as the news is out there at dozens of places in a short period of time. While Apple has commented to say that they don't use facial recognition in store, they haven't denied sending Bah's info to law enforcement to have him charged in four states, with an arrest warrant in NYC. Defendants also made an allegation of theft by Bah at an Apple store in Connecticut.

    gatorguyIreneW
  • Reply 46 of 56
    It's amusing the astonishment and attention regarding the $1B amount.  Hello?  Do you really think the plaintiff and his lawyer are actually expecting that amount of compensation?

    It's a tactic.  It's publicity.  They just want some attention and focus on the case so someone steps up and admits that this shouldn't be happening to the guy.  Whether it's both Apple and the police or just the police or Apple, both have contributed to the situation leading up to the arrest.  Learner's permits aren't to be accepted as a form of ID for anything.  It says so on the permit!  But someone at Apple did.  That was a BIG mistake if you ask me.

    All these unfounded judgements about the guy suing.  Isn't it, or could it be at all possible, that the outcome he and his lawyer are looking for is just a tiny bit of monetary compensation and to make sure that it doesn't happen to him again or anyone else for that matter?

    OK, I'm ready to be attacked for being naive and simplistic.  Go ahead.


    ronn
  • Reply 47 of 56
    larrya said:
    mlafferty said:
    There is less than no basis to his complaint: he will likely get nothing, including no settlement. His complaint should not be directed at Apple or the security firm, as they did nothing directly to facilitate his arrest. The arrest was the result of a presumably lawfully issued warrant, so his whining about the conduct of the police and courts will do no good. Hint: this is not a matter of false arrest. He should take responsibility for his loss of his temporary identification and find another way to snatch his "15 minutes of fame!"
    Let’s drag you out of bed at 5AM for a crime you didn’t commit, using an arrest warrant based on a picture that doesn’t look like you, and see if you don’t do a little “whining”.  
    Question remains... whom do you have the basis to whine about?  

    It’s the police who collect evidence and present to a judge.  Apple would have handed over to the police what they asked for; the in-store surveillance video and any other records of the public’s attendance at their store.  It’s then on the police to utilize that video and other records as evidence in an investigation.  So it’s a failed police investigation that led the police, not Apple, to seek a warrant and then go exercise that warrant.  But of course, it’s not so easy to sue the police or a judge, plus there’s deeper pockets to go after.

    This lawsuit is likely predicated on the calculation that embarrassment to Apple is worth more than an attempt to fight city hall.  As such, it’s baseless, but the best shot the kid and his lawyer has. 
    CorrAppleInsider said:
    It's suggested that a thief may have obtained Bah's lost learner's permit -- one without a photo -- and used that as a form of ID at Apple stores. In a bid to track down the suspect, Apple may have mistakenly connected the permit with another person's face.

    The security firm named in the case is Security Industry Specialists. Both it and Apple have declined comment.

    Based on its track record, Apple will most likely try to settle out of court unless it can clearly demonstrate it wasn't at fault and/or that the accusation is frivolous.
    Based on the above, Apple was careless in accepting a Learner's Permit as a valid ID for "something".  Had they not, there would be no story here.  But of course, no comment from Apple and Security Industry Specialists.
    ronn
  • Reply 48 of 56
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    mistergsf said:
    larrya said:
    mlafferty said:
    There is less than no basis to his complaint: he will likely get nothing, including no settlement. His complaint should not be directed at Apple or the security firm, as they did nothing directly to facilitate his arrest. The arrest was the result of a presumably lawfully issued warrant, so his whining about the conduct of the police and courts will do no good. Hint: this is not a matter of false arrest. He should take responsibility for his loss of his temporary identification and find another way to snatch his "15 minutes of fame!"
    Let’s drag you out of bed at 5AM for a crime you didn’t commit, using an arrest warrant based on a picture that doesn’t look like you, and see if you don’t do a little “whining”.  
    Question remains... whom do you have the basis to whine about?  

    It’s the police who collect evidence and present to a judge.  Apple would have handed over to the police what they asked for; the in-store surveillance video and any other records of the public’s attendance at their store.  It’s then on the police to utilize that video and other records as evidence in an investigation.  So it’s a failed police investigation that led the police, not Apple, to seek a warrant and then go exercise that warrant.  But of course, it’s not so easy to sue the police or a judge, plus there’s deeper pockets to go after.

    This lawsuit is likely predicated on the calculation that embarrassment to Apple is worth more than an attempt to fight city hall.  As such, it’s baseless, but the best shot the kid and his lawyer has. 
    CorrAppleInsider said:
    It's suggested that a thief may have obtained Bah's lost learner's permit -- one without a photo -- and used that as a form of ID at Apple stores. In a bid to track down the suspect, Apple may have mistakenly connected the permit with another person's face.

    The security firm named in the case is Security Industry Specialists. Both it and Apple have declined comment.

    Based on its track record, Apple will most likely try to settle out of court unless it can clearly demonstrate it wasn't at fault and/or that the accusation is frivolous.
    Based on the above, Apple was careless in accepting a Learner's Permit as a valid ID for "something".  Had they not, there would be no story here.  But of course, no comment from Apple and Security Industry Specialists.

    None of this story makes sense as written. A guy has his ID stolen. The ID is used in an Apple Store which supposedly has facial recognition (it doesn’t). It’s not clear what the criminal was using the id for. Did he leave it behind when he ran off with a watch? Or did he use it along with a fraudulent credit card? And do learner permits really have no photos in New York? 

    Anyway the perp uses this stolen license to defraud an Apple store somehow and we are led to believe that, coincidently, facial recognition software fingered the same guy who lost the license without the photo. 

    Probably not. It’s possible the police made a mistake, found the picture free license (again, really?) and had a picture of the fraudster from the store and got a warrant issued on that set of circumstances, which seems valid enough. 

    Apple should definitely not settle here even for much lower than asked for, that precedent would cost them much more in the long term than a few stolen watches

  • Reply 49 of 56
    RadMaxRadMax Posts: 12member
    He should have sued for a billion gazillion quadrillion quintillion dollars.  Whoa!!
  • Reply 50 of 56
    mistergsfmistergsf Posts: 238member
    asdasd said:
    mistergsf said:
    larrya said:
    mlafferty said:
    There is less than no basis to his complaint: he will likely get nothing, including no settlement. His complaint should not be directed at Apple or the security firm, as they did nothing directly to facilitate his arrest. The arrest was the result of a presumably lawfully issued warrant, so his whining about the conduct of the police and courts will do no good. Hint: this is not a matter of false arrest. He should take responsibility for his loss of his temporary identification and find another way to snatch his "15 minutes of fame!"
    Let’s drag you out of bed at 5AM for a crime you didn’t commit, using an arrest warrant based on a picture that doesn’t look like you, and see if you don’t do a little “whining”.  
    Question remains... whom do you have the basis to whine about?  

    It’s the police who collect evidence and present to a judge.  Apple would have handed over to the police what they asked for; the in-store surveillance video and any other records of the public’s attendance at their store.  It’s then on the police to utilize that video and other records as evidence in an investigation.  So it’s a failed police investigation that led the police, not Apple, to seek a warrant and then go exercise that warrant.  But of course, it’s not so easy to sue the police or a judge, plus there’s deeper pockets to go after.

    This lawsuit is likely predicated on the calculation that embarrassment to Apple is worth more than an attempt to fight city hall.  As such, it’s baseless, but the best shot the kid and his lawyer has. 
    CorrAppleInsider said:
    It's suggested that a thief may have obtained Bah's lost learner's permit -- one without a photo -- and used that as a form of ID at Apple stores. In a bid to track down the suspect, Apple may have mistakenly connected the permit with another person's face.

    The security firm named in the case is Security Industry Specialists. Both it and Apple have declined comment.

    Based on its track record, Apple will most likely try to settle out of court unless it can clearly demonstrate it wasn't at fault and/or that the accusation is frivolous.
    Based on the above, Apple was careless in accepting a Learner's Permit as a valid ID for "something".  Had they not, there would be no story here.  But of course, no comment from Apple and Security Industry Specialists.

    None of this story makes sense as written. A guy has his ID stolen. The ID is used in an Apple Store which supposedly has facial recognition (it doesn’t). It’s not clear what the criminal was using the id for. Did he leave it behind when he ran off with a watch? Or did he use it along with a fraudulent credit card? And do learner permits really have no photos in New York? 

    Anyway the perp uses this stolen license to defraud an Apple store somehow and we are led to believe that, coincidently, facial recognition software fingered the same guy who lost the license without the photo. 

    Probably not. It’s possible the police made a mistake, found the picture free license (again, really?) and had a picture of the fraudster from the store and got a warrant issued on that set of circumstances, which seems valid enough. 

    Apple should definitely not settle here even for much lower than asked for, that precedent would cost them much more in the long term than a few stolen watches

    So, you say "none of the story makes sense as written, but you can conclude "Apple should definitely not settle"?   The story appears to be the plaintiff's learner's permit was lost, not stolen.  But regardless, that lost or stolen permit made it to Apple cause they accepted it as a "legal and valid" ID.  How, why, and for what?  We don't know.

    How can Apple not be negligent for that portion of events that led to the police being involved and then the plaintiff's unlawful arrest.  And, by "negligent" I'm only saying that  Apple made a poor decision by accepting an invalid ID.  Apple didn't do anything illegal but that doesn't mean they have no accountability.  Does it?  Hmmm.
  • Reply 51 of 56
    ronnronn Posts: 567member
    Bah didn't lose ID. He lost an Interim Learner's Permit (ILP). He would have received the actual Learner's Permit within ten days so apparently was not concerned about the lost of the ILP. The IPL expires within 60 days, IIRC. And it has “not meant for identification purposes” typed on it, along with general info (age, height, eye color and current address). It doesn't have a photo attached to it. Yet Apple apprehended a thief and allowed him to present Bah's ILP as ID. Utterly ridiculous. They should have required a valid photo ID or had him taken in by Boston PD.

    According to the lawsuit, the perp doesn't match the info on the ILP. When the NYPD foolishly arrested Bah even though the photo attached to the warrant was clearly of someone else, they had a detective (Reinhold as named in the lawsuit and quoted directly by The Verge in their article) view the surveillance video from the Apple NYC store theft and he said "the suspect 'looked nothing like' Mr. Bah." This is when Apple should have apologized, contacted all relevant authorities to withdraw its claims against Mr. Bah in the four jurisdictions, and then negotiate with Mr. Bah's attorneys for an amicable settlement. They also need to retrain their security staffs in at least two locations, if not all.
  • Reply 52 of 56
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,805unconfirmed, member
    Why isn’t he suing the police? I’m pretty sure Apple didn’t barge into his house to arrest him. More likely they forwarded the information to the police who then made the decision (likely with input from the prosecutor). They apparently thought the evidence was sufficient.

    You can't sue those scumbags. They refuse to arrest themselves. 
  • Reply 53 of 56
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    mistergsf said:
    asdasd said:
    mistergsf said:
    larrya said:
    mlafferty said:
    There is less than no basis to his complaint: he will likely get nothing, including no settlement. His complaint should not be directed at Apple or the security firm, as they did nothing directly to facilitate his arrest. The arrest was the result of a presumably lawfully issued warrant, so his whining about the conduct of the police and courts will do no good. Hint: this is not a matter of false arrest. He should take responsibility for his loss of his temporary identification and find another way to snatch his "15 minutes of fame!"
    Let’s drag you out of bed at 5AM for a crime you didn’t commit, using an arrest warrant based on a picture that doesn’t look like you, and see if you don’t do a little “whining”.  
    Question remains... whom do you have the basis to whine about?  

    It’s the police who collect evidence and present to a judge.  Apple would have handed over to the police what they asked for; the in-store surveillance video and any other records of the public’s attendance at their store.  It’s then on the police to utilize that video and other records as evidence in an investigation.  So it’s a failed police investigation that led the police, not Apple, to seek a warrant and then go exercise that warrant.  But of course, it’s not so easy to sue the police or a judge, plus there’s deeper pockets to go after.

    This lawsuit is likely predicated on the calculation that embarrassment to Apple is worth more than an attempt to fight city hall.  As such, it’s baseless, but the best shot the kid and his lawyer has. 
    CorrAppleInsider said:
    It's suggested that a thief may have obtained Bah's lost learner's permit -- one without a photo -- and used that as a form of ID at Apple stores. In a bid to track down the suspect, Apple may have mistakenly connected the permit with another person's face.

    The security firm named in the case is Security Industry Specialists. Both it and Apple have declined comment.

    Based on its track record, Apple will most likely try to settle out of court unless it can clearly demonstrate it wasn't at fault and/or that the accusation is frivolous.
    Based on the above, Apple was careless in accepting a Learner's Permit as a valid ID for "something".  Had they not, there would be no story here.  But of course, no comment from Apple and Security Industry Specialists.

    None of this story makes sense as written. A guy has his ID stolen. The ID is used in an Apple Store which supposedly has facial recognition (it doesn’t). It’s not clear what the criminal was using the id for. Did he leave it behind when he ran off with a watch? Or did he use it along with a fraudulent credit card? And do learner permits really have no photos in New York? 

    Anyway the perp uses this stolen license to defraud an Apple store somehow and we are led to believe that, coincidently, facial recognition software fingered the same guy who lost the license without the photo. 

    Probably not. It’s possible the police made a mistake, found the picture free license (again, really?) and had a picture of the fraudster from the store and got a warrant issued on that set of circumstances, which seems valid enough. 

    Apple should definitely not settle here even for much lower than asked for, that precedent would cost them much more in the long term than a few stolen watches

    So, you say "none of the story makes sense as written, but you can conclude "Apple should definitely not settle"?   The story appears to be the plaintiff's learner's permit was lost, not stolen.  But regardless, that lost or stolen permit made it to Apple cause they accepted it as a "legal and valid" ID.  How, why, and for what?  We don't know.

    How can Apple not be negligent for that portion of events that led to the police being involved and then the plaintiff's unlawful arrest.  And, by "negligent" I'm only saying that  Apple made a poor decision by accepting an invalid ID.  Apple didn't do anything illegal but that doesn't mean they have no accountability.  Does it?  Hmmm.
    Probably not to the tune of one billion dollars all the same. Yes Apple could be more diligent but they didn’t arrest the guy. Presumably a learners permit is valid id in NY. 
  • Reply 54 of 56
    ronnronn Posts: 567member
    asdasd said:
    mistergsf said:
    asdasd said:
    mistergsf said:
    larrya said:
    mlafferty said:
    There is less than no basis to his complaint: he will likely get nothing, including no settlement. His complaint should not be directed at Apple or the security firm, as they did nothing directly to facilitate his arrest. The arrest was the result of a presumably lawfully issued warrant, so his whining about the conduct of the police and courts will do no good. Hint: this is not a matter of false arrest. He should take responsibility for his loss of his temporary identification and find another way to snatch his "15 minutes of fame!"
    Let’s drag you out of bed at 5AM for a crime you didn’t commit, using an arrest warrant based on a picture that doesn’t look like you, and see if you don’t do a little “whining”.  
    Question remains... whom do you have the basis to whine about?  

    It’s the police who collect evidence and present to a judge.  Apple would have handed over to the police what they asked for; the in-store surveillance video and any other records of the public’s attendance at their store.  It’s then on the police to utilize that video and other records as evidence in an investigation.  So it’s a failed police investigation that led the police, not Apple, to seek a warrant and then go exercise that warrant.  But of course, it’s not so easy to sue the police or a judge, plus there’s deeper pockets to go after.

    This lawsuit is likely predicated on the calculation that embarrassment to Apple is worth more than an attempt to fight city hall.  As such, it’s baseless, but the best shot the kid and his lawyer has. 
    CorrAppleInsider said:
    It's suggested that a thief may have obtained Bah's lost learner's permit -- one without a photo -- and used that as a form of ID at Apple stores. In a bid to track down the suspect, Apple may have mistakenly connected the permit with another person's face.

    The security firm named in the case is Security Industry Specialists. Both it and Apple have declined comment.

    Based on its track record, Apple will most likely try to settle out of court unless it can clearly demonstrate it wasn't at fault and/or that the accusation is frivolous.
    Based on the above, Apple was careless in accepting a Learner's Permit as a valid ID for "something".  Had they not, there would be no story here.  But of course, no comment from Apple and Security Industry Specialists.

    None of this story makes sense as written. A guy has his ID stolen. The ID is used in an Apple Store which supposedly has facial recognition (it doesn’t). It’s not clear what the criminal was using the id for. Did he leave it behind when he ran off with a watch? Or did he use it along with a fraudulent credit card? And do learner permits really have no photos in New York? 

    Anyway the perp uses this stolen license to defraud an Apple store somehow and we are led to believe that, coincidently, facial recognition software fingered the same guy who lost the license without the photo. 

    Probably not. It’s possible the police made a mistake, found the picture free license (again, really?) and had a picture of the fraudster from the store and got a warrant issued on that set of circumstances, which seems valid enough. 

    Apple should definitely not settle here even for much lower than asked for, that precedent would cost them much more in the long term than a few stolen watches

    So, you say "none of the story makes sense as written, but you can conclude "Apple should definitely not settle"?   The story appears to be the plaintiff's learner's permit was lost, not stolen.  But regardless, that lost or stolen permit made it to Apple cause they accepted it as a "legal and valid" ID.  How, why, and for what?  We don't know.

    How can Apple not be negligent for that portion of events that led to the police being involved and then the plaintiff's unlawful arrest.  And, by "negligent" I'm only saying that  Apple made a poor decision by accepting an invalid ID.  Apple didn't do anything illegal but that doesn't mean they have no accountability.  Does it?  Hmmm.
    Probably not to the tune of one billion dollars all the same. Yes Apple could be more diligent but they didn’t arrest the guy. Presumably a learners permit is valid id in NY. 
    The interim learner's permit is not valid ID in NY. It actually has “not meant for identification purposes” on the front.
    asdasd
  • Reply 55 of 56
    ronnronn Posts: 567member
    Bah's lawyer has given the Boston theft video to the media: 

  • Reply 56 of 56
    ronnronn Posts: 567member
    Bah ultimately filed lawsuits in New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts. Apple's motion for dismissal was approved on September 27, 2021 (although the court did not sanction Bah's attorney as Apple wanted) for the Massachusetts case.

    https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-mad-1_21-cv-10897/pdf/USCOURTS-mad-1_21-cv-10897-0.pdf

    I could find no info on the other two cases.
Sign In or Register to comment.