Flock's AI surveillance cameras expand across US amid mounting privacy backlash

More than 130,000 AI-powered licence plate readers run by the private firm Flock are now operating across the United States, according to a BBC Verify analysis. The cameras, which are mounted on poles and traffic lights, photograph every passing vehicle and use artificial intelligence to read and record number plates. The system is primarily used by law enforcement agencies, which subscribe to receive alerts when vehicles connected with criminal activity are detected.

The rapid expansion has triggered a growing backlash. Privacy advocates say the network amounts to mass surveillance, enabling authorities to track the movements of millions of people who are not suspected of any wrongdoing. Protests have been held in several communities, and some local governments have voted to remove or restrict the devices. In response, Flock has defended the technology, arguing that it helps solve crimes and recovers stolen vehicles, and that it stores data only for a limited period.

Licence plate readers are not new; they have been used by police for decades. What distinguishes Flock's system is its scale and the business model. The company markets its cameras not only to police but also to neighbourhood associations and private businesses, creating a unified network where cameras from different subscribers share alerts with one another. Critics argue that this effectively creates a private surveillance grid that operates alongside public law enforcement, with limited oversight.

The debate highlights the broader tension between public safety and privacy. Supporters, including many police chiefs, say the system has led to arrests in cases of violent crime and helped locate missing persons. They maintain that the cameras do not capture faces and are used to identify stolen cars or vehicles linked to warrants, not to monitor regular drivers. Flock also says it allows communities to set data retention rules, which can range from hours to a few weeks, depending on local preferences.

However, civil liberties groups caution that even if the system is used narrowly today, the technology could be expanded or abused in the future. The location of every vehicle at all times is a sensitive piece of data. In some jurisdictions, access to ALPR data is not strictly regulated, and there have been reports of police officers misusing similar systems for personal reasons. Transparency is also a concern: Flock does not publish a complete map of where its cameras are installed, making it difficult for residents to know when they are under observation.

Several states have passed laws to regulate licence plate readers, but the rules are varied. Some require that data be deleted after a set period, while others allow indefinite retention. Flock has introduced features to address privacy concerns, such as anonymising data and restricting access to law enforcement within a specific area. Yet the underlying issue remains unresolved: Should a private company be allowed to build a vast, searchable database of everyone's movements on public roads?

The BBC Verify report also notes that the growth of Flock's network has been rapid. Founded only a few years ago, the company has expanded to many states, and its cameras are often placed in wealthier neighbourhoods, according to critics. This has raised questions about equity, as affluent communities can afford surveillance that poorer areas cannot. If the technology proves effective in solving crimes, its unequal distribution could widen disparities in policing.

As the backlash continues, Flock faces a challenge: convincing the public that a system which records the comings and goings of every vehicle is a useful tool and not an infringement of civil liberties. The company has sought to reassure users by emphasising its compliance with local laws and its commitment to privacy protections. But the controversy is unlikely to fade, especially as artificial intelligence becomes ever more capable of linking data from multiple sources.

For now, the United States serves as a testing ground for a surveillance model that could be exported elsewhere. The outcome of this debate will have implications not just for Flock, but for the wider use of AI in law enforcement around the world. The challenge is to find a balance that allows the police to use technology effectively while protecting the right to privacy in a free society.