RFID Bill of Rights

By Bob Trebilcock, Editor at Large -- Modern Materials Handling, 7/25/2006

Privacy advocates want to limit the use of RFID to applications that will never touch the consumer without a person's consent.

Last May, Wisconsin became the first state to pass legislation restricting the use of RFID technology. The bill makes it a crime to require an individual to be implanted with an RFID tag or microchip that could be used to track their movements.

That may seem like a law in search of a crime that has yet to be committed. Even privacy advocates who cheer the bill are unaware of any company or government agency that has tried to put RFID chips in their employees or citizens.

But it does highlight the kinds of privacy issues being raised about RFID.

What has privacy advocates up in arms? “RFID is a great technology for tracking pallets from point A to point B,” says Liz McIntyre, communication director for CASPIAN Consumer Advocacy, one of the organizations leading the charge to regulate RFID. “Where we draw the line is when it’s placed on individual items and cartons that consumers will interact with on the sales floor and buy.”

McIntyre’s concerns are summed up in the title of a book she co-authored: “Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Move with RFID.”

“The plan is to get more granular information to track individual items. And once there’s an infrastructure and databases in place, the next step is for business and government to do something further with that information without notifying the public,” says McIntyre, adding that the government is already mining commercial data from businesses they can’t get themselves. “That’s why we need to be very proactive as consumers and tell these companies ‘no’ to item-level tagging.”

To back up her arguments, McIntyre points to patent applications from a major technology company for “a person tracking unit” that could link the purchase of a specific item to an individual. She’s also concerned by plans for smart shelves that could record how long a shopper holds an item picked up from a shelf (and maybe also read the RFID-enabled customer loyalty card in their pocket). There’s also a proposal for RFID readers that could read RFID tags on boxes and items discarded at the dump.

“Industry says they’re just putting tags on boxes that will get thrown away when you’re done with them, so there is no harm,” says McIntrye. “But when you’ve got an RFID reader at the dump, you will not be able to escape the RFID world.”

The fix, say privacy advocates, is information. They want manufacturers and retailers to clearly label the products that are tagged. They also want an “opt-in” policy that allows retailers to track products only after a consumer has opted-in and agreed to have a live RFID tag on their products.

Their concerns have gotten the attention of some state legislators. At least a dozen states, including California, Massachusetts, Nevada, Tennessee and Texas, have considered bills affecting RFID. Most of those would require manufacturers and retailers to notify consumers prior to a sale of the presence of RFID tracking devices on the products they’re buying.

While none has passed, privacy advocates like CASPIAN intend to keep the pressure on business and government. “The reason for the Bill of Rights is to control the power of government,” says McIntyre. “We have to be careful to guard our civil rights and privacy.”