zlacker

> seems like you would have a poor argument that you can’t collect and analyze images of a public space

Absolutely agree... but the CA law is clear that tracking license plates get special treatment! It being public space doesn't matter. It's wild to me that how you analyze the video is regulated. Also that no similar regulation for the regular public doing facial recognition exists. Just ALPR.

I wonder how I'm supposed to comply with the law if I were to take a public webcam feed, like one from a highway[0], and run ALPR on it myself. I obviously can't post any notices there. And I'm not the camera operator so can't comply with anything related to that. But I would be doing ALPR which does require I follow rules. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Will be interesting to see what happens to the law. It feels outdated, but I'm doubtful any CA politician is going to expend karma making ALPR more permissive. So I bet it'll stay on the books and just go largely unenforced.

https://go511.com/TrafficTransit/Cameras

>>varenc+(OP)
I would blatantly ignore that law. I am in a position to easily fight a state entity with legal resources. They definitely cannot regulate that constitutionally. As a private citizen I am not posting notices. It is bad law that doesn't protect anyone and erodes protected rights.

>>bitexp+Fu1
Maybe they can't regulate that "constitutionally" (for your understanding of that document, which has no legal weight).

They still might be able to regulate it for all practical purposes.

>>IAmBro+mX1
Potentially. I care a lot about this. I think this is a pretty easy case to fight them on 1A grounds as the case law is quite settled and clear per my understanding. So they can have unconstitutional laws on the books, but the long tail of that fight is against the.