The Drugstore Match — Rite Aid, Five Years, and a False Flag

December 19, 2023. The Federal Trade Commission announced that Rite Aid would be prohibited from using facial recognition technology for surveillance purposes for five years. Samuel Levine, Bureau of Consumer Protection, in the release: reckless use; customers facing humiliation; order violations putting sensitive information at risk. The complaint, filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, said that from 2012 to 2020 the company deployed AI-based facial recognition in hundreds of stores to identify customers who may have been engaged in shoplifting or other problematic behavior, and that it failed to take reasonable measures to prevent harm. Employees, in that weather, erroneously accused consumers because the system falsely flagged them as matching someone previously identified as a shoplifter. The FTC said the false tags fell particularly on women and people of color.

I printed the release. Odette asked if five years was a sentence. I said it was a ban. She said sentences are for people. I said this sentence is a drugstore. She wiped the seven. The seven stayed.

Match alerts, in the WilmerHale walk of the 54-page complaint, generally did not give the actual confidence score to store employees. Instructions could be "observe and provide customer service" or "notify police." A score the employee cannot see is still a score. A score the employee cannot see is this book's whiteboard in a smaller font.

The complaint also charged violations of a 2010 order that required a comprehensive information security program and document retention for vendor management. Two kitchens. One company. A prior order and a later ban. I will not invent the 2010 kitchen. I will say a company can already be under an order and still deploy a match, and that already is a public.

Rite Aid, in those rooms, was in bankruptcy weather. I will not freeze a bankruptcy as a finding that the ban is imaginary. I will say a ban can share a year with a bankruptcy, and that sharing is a calendar.

Rudd wrote 2012-2020 / 5yr ban / 2010 order / ED Pa and boxed 5yr. He punched a coupon that had used the word safety. He said safety is another book's lobby. I said safety is this book's match in a polo. He dated the pad with a pencil because the punch does not date.

I sat, while I still had a badge, in a meeting whose title was loss-prevention hygiene. Someone said we should "not look like a drugstore." I said we should not look like a match we had not filed. Legal said we should take look offline. We shipped a sentence about customer experience. Experience is a brochure.

Cole asked whether "the Rite Aid thing" meant "the tech doesn't work." I said work is a polo word. He said then why the ban. I said the ban is a false flag. He took a cart.

I will not give you a surveillance checklist. I will tell you the release happened, that 2012 to 2020 is a window, that a confidence score the clerk cannot see is still a score, and that Tansy still shops at drugstores that may or may not have a camera she can see. The next room is an interview. The flag is this one.

The Docket I Will Not Call a Conviction

FTC Matter 2023190. Federal court: Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Docket 2:23-cv-5023. Plaintiff: Federal Trade Commission. Defendants: Rite Aid Corporation and Rite Aid Hdqtrs. Corp. The Commission voted 3–0 to authorize staff to file the complaint and the proposed stipulated order. Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya released a statement, in the release I walked. I will not reconstruct the statement. I will say a 3–0 is a count, and that a statement is a mouth, and that a mouth can share a day with a complaint.

The complaint charges unfair acts or practices in violation of Sections 5(a) and 5(n) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 45(a) and 45(n), in connection with facial-recognition practices and with failure to implement or maintain a comprehensive information security program in violation of Part II of the Commission's Decision and Order in In re Rite Aid Corporation, C-4308, 150 F.T.C. 694 (November 12, 2010). Relief under Section 13(b), 15 U.S.C. § 53(b). I am putting C-4308 in this room so a grocery line cannot call 2010 a vibe. November 12, 2010, is a docket. December 19, 2023, is a later complaint that names the earlier order. Two kitchens. One company.

The release said the order would go into effect after approval from the bankruptcy court and the federal district court as well as modification of the 2010 order by the Commission. I will not freeze a bankruptcy as a finding that the ban is imaginary. I will say a ban can share a year with a bankruptcy, and that two courts plus a Commission modification are a seating chart, and that a seating chart is a public.

February 26, 2024. Judge Kelley B. Hodge, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, entered a Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction and Other Relief resolving the 2023 complaint, in the Commission's later reopening paper. In Section II of that stipulated order, Rite Aid consented to reopening the 2010 proceeding in Docket C-4308, waiving show-cause procedures under 16 C.F.R. § 3.72(b), and modifying the 2010 order. The Commission then reopened C-4308 and issued a new Decision and Order. I am putting February 26 next to December 19 so a grocery line cannot call the press release the injunction. A release is weather. An entry is a stamp. Hodge is a name on a stamp I will not invent a personality for.

I am allowed a second lighting of February 26, 2024, because a grocery line will lose the interview cousin. Same date. Deyerler federal motion in Chicago weather. Rite Aid stipulated order in Philadelphia weather. I will not write a plot that says a drugstore and an interview called each other. Calendars are not switchboards. Two stamps. One Tuesday I did not sit. I printed both first pages and put them on the sideboard with a band from Kade's bag. Odette moved the band because solvent drips. She did not move the seven. She asked if two stamps were a stain that spread. I said they were a day. She said days are for milk. I said this day is a drugstore and an interview in different districts. She pumped solvent. Marker smell. The hold song stayed muted.

Ash said the shared date was frictionless cross-docket synergy. I said synergy is a vest hoping a calendar is a product. He said then why mention it. I said because a grocery line will spend February 26 as if it were only Hodge, or only Deyerler, and I will keep both labels. He buffed a shoe.

I will not give you a surveillance checklist. I will not give you a 15(c) you can revive. I will tell you Hodge entered a stipulated order on a day a federal interview cousin also split a motion, that 3–0 is still a count, that C-4308 is still November 12, 2010, and that neither admit nor deny is still how that drugstore kitchen sleeps. The interview is still the next room if you have not already walked it. The flag is still this one.

Rudd wrote 2:23-cv-5023 / C-4308 / Nov 12 2010 / 3-0 / Hodge Feb 26 2024 / neither admit nor deny and boxed neither. The stipulated papers I walked say respondents neither admit nor deny the allegations except as specifically stated, and admit the facts necessary to establish jurisdiction for purposes of the action only. Neither is how museums keep a door. Neither is how clients sleep. I paid the invoice.

Odette asked if a stipulated order was a coupon. I said it was an entry. She said entries are for diaries. I said this entry is a five-year ban that had to clear a bankruptcy kitchen. She wiped the seven.

The Alert the Clerk Cannot See

Match alerts, in the WilmerHale walk of the complaint, generally did not give the actual confidence score to store employees. Instructions could be "observe and provide customer service" or "notify police." I already put that sentence in the first room. I am walking it again because a score the employee cannot see is this book's whiteboard, and a whiteboard is allowed a second lighting.

The proposed order, in the Commission's own summary, requires comprehensive safeguards when deploying automated systems that use biometric information to track consumers or flag them as security risks, and requires discontinuing such technology if the company cannot control potential risks. It also requires a robust information security program overseen by top executives, to settle the 2010-order charges about failing to oversee service providers. I will not typeset the safeguards as a checklist. I will say a safeguard can be a paragraph, and that a paragraph can share an order with a five-year timeout, and that oversight by top executives is a sentence I will not upgrade to a finding that a Tuesday is safe.

Dale sells light bulbs in a bin that still has a wattage card. I bought a bulb I did not need because a hall still wants a light over a whiteboard and a seven still wants to be seen so it can be refused. He asked if I was remodeling. I said I was dating a ban. He said bans are for trucks. I said this ban is a drugstore. He dated the receipt. Wattage is honest. Safeguards are a paragraph.

Tansy still shops at drugstores. I will not invent a flag on her. She asked whether "the Rite Aid thing" meant every camera was a match. I said I would not invent every camera. She said then why the chapter. I said because a false flag can be a public and a confidence score can be hidden from the person who has to decide whether to call the police. She paid for the coffee.

Cole asked whether "Hodge" meant "it's over." I said over is a polo word. He said then why February. I said February is an entry. He took a cart.

Ash, at a dinner I paid for because the menu had no prices, said frictionless loss prevention as if a hyphen could make a match a service. I said frictionless is a vest word. He said then why the FTC. I said the FTC is 3–0 and a complaint. He left in a car that had a person.

I will not give you a surveillance checklist. I will tell you 2:23-cv-5023 happened, that C-4308 is November 12, 2010, that the vote was 3–0, that Hodge entered a stipulated order on February 26, 2024, that neither admit nor deny sat in the papers, that bankruptcy was a second kitchen on the same calendar, and that a clerk can be told to notify police without being shown a number. The interview is still the next room. The flag is still this one.