The B.C. Court of Appeal has delivered a significant blow to Clearview AI, rejecting the facial recognition company's appeal against a provincial privacy commissioner's order that prohibited its use of social media images from British Columbia residents. The court's decision reinforces the applicability of local privacy laws to global tech firms operating online.
Court Upholds Privacy Commissioner's 2021 Order
In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel dismissed Clearview AI's attempt to overturn a 2021 order from the B.C. privacy commissioner. That order had three key components:
- Prohibiting Clearview from offering its facial recognition services in B.C.
- Requiring the company to cease collecting, using, and disclosing images of B.C. residents
- Mandating deletion of existing B.C. resident data from Clearview's databases
Justice Karen Horsman, writing on behalf of Justices Nitya Iyer and Paul Riley, found the commissioner's orders reasonable and enforceable. The court specifically rejected Clearview's argument that it lacked sufficient connection to British Columbia to be subject to the province's privacy legislation.
Clearview's Constitutional Challenge Fails
The U.S.-based company had argued that B.C.'s Protection of Information and Privacy Act (PIPA) didn't apply to its operations because it claimed to have no substantial connection to the province. Clearview maintained that its collection of facial data in B.C. was merely incidental to its global operations and that its business model required worldwide image collection to build effective databases.
Justice Horsman countered this position directly, stating: "In my view, this supports a conclusion that B.C.'s relationship to Clearview is substantial, not incidental." The judge warned that accepting Clearview's argument would create a dangerous precedent, potentially immunizing any company collecting personal information online from domestic privacy laws.
Consent Requirements and Public Availability Arguments
Clearview also contended that it shouldn't need individual consent to use social media images because they were publicly posted. The court rejected this interpretation of privacy law, affirming that public availability doesn't negate privacy protections under PIPA.
The company had described the commissioner's orders as "overbroad, unnecessary and unenforceable," particularly arguing that it couldn't technically remove B.C. images already in its databases. However, the court noted that Clearview had previously agreed to similar restrictions in Illinois litigation, blocking client searches from examining that state's residents' data.
Broader Implications for Privacy Protection
Justice Horsman emphasized the broader significance of the ruling: "Clearview's position that PIPA is constitutionally inapplicable to it means that it, and any other company that acquires personal information on the internet using a global search engine, would be immune from domestic privacy laws. This would significantly compromise the ability of jurisdictions such as B.C. to protect personal information on the internet."
The decision comes after Clearview claimed it had ceased operating in British Columbia in 2020 when the RCMP stopped using its services. Despite this claim, the court found the ongoing orders justified and enforceable, requiring Clearview to engage with the privacy commissioner to demonstrate compliance.
This ruling represents a significant victory for privacy advocates in Canada and establishes important precedent for how provincial privacy laws apply to international technology companies operating in digital spaces. The case highlights growing tensions between global data collection practices and regional privacy protections in an increasingly interconnected world.
