The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), implemented by the European Union, classifies biometric data as "sensitive personal data" and imposes strict rules on its collection and processing. Under GDPR, biometric data cannot be collected without explicit consent unless it serves a legitimate legal purpose, such as law enforcement investigations.
Max Schrems, an Austrian privacy activist and lawyer, has argued that many biometric data collection practices violate GDPR principles. “Companies are collecting biometric data without proper user consent and often without users even realizing it. That’s a major problem under GDPR.”
Unlike the EU, the United States lacks a comprehensive federal law on biometric data. Instead, individual states have begun enacting their own regulations.
One of the strictest biometric laws in the U.S. is the Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) in Illinois. BIPA requires companies to:
David Stauss, a privacy law attorney at Husch Blackwell, says, “Illinois’ BIPA is the most robust biometric data law in the U.S., and it’s setting the tone for other states. Lawsuits under BIPA have skyrocketed, showing that companies need to take biometric privacy seriously.”
Other states, such as Texas and California, have introduced similar biometric data laws, and federal regulation remains a topic of debate in Congress.
Facebook’s $650 Million BIPA Settlement: In one of the biggest biometric privacy lawsuits, Facebook (now Meta) was sued under BIPA for improperly collecting and storing facial recognition data without consent. The company ultimately agreed to a $650 million settlement, highlighting the serious legal risks companies face when violating biometric laws.
Jay Edelson, the attorney leading the lawsuit against Facebook, said, “This case is a major wake-up call for big tech companies. If they don’t follow biometric privacy laws, they will pay the price—literally.”
Clearview AI’s Controversial Biometric Database: Clearview AI, a facial recognition startup, faced legal actions in multiple countries for scraping billions of facial images from social media without consent. The company’s database was used by law enforcement agencies, raising concerns about mass surveillance and privacy violations.
Evan Greer, director of the digital rights advocacy group Fight for the Future, criticized Clearview AI’s actions: “This kind of mass biometric surveillance is a dangerous violation of human rights. There’s no oversight, no accountability, and it opens the door for abuse on a global scale.”
Amazon and the Ring Doorbell Privacy Scandal: Amazon-owned Ring came under fire for sharing facial recognition data with law enforcement without user consent. The controversy raised concerns about the growing use of biometric technology in consumer products and the lack of transparency in data-sharing agreements.
Senator Edward Markey, a strong advocate for biometric privacy, stated, “Consumers should not have to trade their biometric data for convenience. Companies must be held accountable when they misuse sensitive personal information.”
Surveillance and Civil Liberties: One of the biggest concerns with biometric data is its use in mass surveillance. Government agencies and private companies increasingly deploy facial recognition in public spaces, often without clear regulations or oversight.
Shoshana Zuboff, author of The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, warns, “The unchecked use of biometric data is a gateway to a surveillance society where individuals have no control over how their identities are tracked and exploited.”
Data Breaches and Security Risks: Unlike passwords, biometric data cannot be changed if leaked. High-profile biometric data breaches have already occurred, including the 2019 breach of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection database, which exposed facial recognition data of thousands of travelers.
According to Jake Moore, a cybersecurity expert at ESET, “A breach of biometric data is far worse than a credit card hack. You can replace a stolen card, but you can’t replace your face or fingerprints.”
Algorithmic Bias and Discrimination: Studies have shown that facial recognition technology is less accurate for people of color and women, leading to false identifications and potential discrimination. This bias has resulted in wrongful arrests and increased concerns about racial profiling.
Joy Buolamwini, an AI researcher at the MIT Media Lab, has been vocal about these issues: “When biometric systems are biased, they don’t just fail—they fail in ways that disproportionately harm marginalized communities.”
Stronger Laws and Global Standards: Privacy advocates and legal experts predict stricter regulations on biometric data in the coming years. Many are pushing for a federal biometric privacy law in the U.S. and stronger international agreements to prevent misuse.
Elizabeth Denham, former UK Information Commissioner, has called for a unified approach: “Biometric data laws must evolve to protect individuals, not just in specific countries, but globally. This is a human rights issue.”
Advances in Privacy-Preserving Technology: Companies are exploring privacy-preserving technologies, such as federated learning and differential privacy, to minimize the risks of biometric data misuse. These methods allow authentication without storing raw biometric data.
According to Brad Smith, President of Microsoft, “The future of biometric security must prioritize user control. People should have ownership over their biometric data, just like they do with financial information.”
As biometric technology becomes more prevalent, the legal and ethical challenges surrounding its use will only grow. Governments and regulators must strike a balance between innovation and privacy protection, ensuring that biometric data is used responsibly.
For businesses, the message is clear: non-compliance with biometric privacy laws can lead to massive legal and financial consequences. Companies must prioritize transparency, consent, and security to avoid costly litigation and public backlash.
Ultimately, the future of biometric regulation will depend on strong laws, responsible innovation, and ongoing advocacy to protect individual rights in the digital age.
If you like this article, comment on it 💬 to share your thoughts and join the discussion on how governments regulate biometric data!
