Text settings Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only Learn more Minimize to nav A lawsuit against Amazon is seeking financial damages for millions of Americans whose faces may have been recorded by Ring cameras since the Familiar Faces feature was rolled out late last year.
Plaintiff Charles Sigwalt yesterday filed a class action suit that aims to represent all people in the US “who had their facial recognition data collected, retained, and otherwise used by the Familiar Faces feature created and implemented by Defendant.” The lawsuit will seek “far” more than $5 million, but the $5 million figure was given in the complaint because US district courts have jurisdiction for civil actions seeking at least that amount.
“Here, there are millions of Americans who have walked by Ring cameras which have activated the Familiar Faces feature… the damages in this action far exceed $5,000,000.00 when calculating the statutory damages that may be owed to each Class member in addition to the actual damages caused by the aggregate loss of value of biometric information,” the lawsuit said.
Ring’s Familiar Faces feature is designed to identify people who appear at one’s door and provide alerts to the owner of the camera. Amazon says Familiar Faces is not enabled by default but that owners of Ring cameras can turn it on. Ring camera users can create a “personal directory of up to 50 familiar faces” so they can be alerted when one comes to the door.
Sigwalt lives in Virginia and filed the suit in US District Court for the Western District of Washington, where Amazon is headquartered. He proposes a nationwide class of all people in the US whose faces were scanned and a subclass for Virginia residents.
“Familiar Faces uses facial recognition technology to scan the face of all guests and passersby before categorizing who they are using artificial intelligence,” the lawsuit said. “AI then collects a ‘face print’ of the respective person and translates it into a unique patchwork of numbers that allows Ring to re-identify who that person is each time Familiar Faces deploys facial recognition on them.”
The complaint notes that Familiar Faces isn’t available everywhere in the US because some areas have stricter privacy laws than others:
Ring clearly has the ability to follow biometric privacy laws with respect to the Familiar Faces feature—but it deliberately chooses not to. Specifically, Ring told The Washington Post that Familiar Faces will not be available in Texas, Illinois, or Portland, Oregon because each jurisdiction has strict laws banning this type of biometric facial recognition surveillance. However, the rest of the country, including Plaintiff and Class members do not get the same respect.
The lawsuit argues that Amazon’s conduct is illegal even in parts of the US without specific laws banning this type of facial recognition. The lawsuit pointed to a Federal Trade Commission policy statement that businesses “engaging in surreptitious and unexpected collection or use of biometric information” may violate the FTC Act’s prohibition on deceptive and unfair trade practices.
“Ring’s collection, retention, and use of biometric information without adequate consent demonstrates that Ring violates Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act—which protects against deceptive and unfair trade practices,” the complaint said, adding that “Ring’s collection of facial recognition [data] violates basic notions of consumer privacy in the United States.”
The lawsuit further alleges violations of Virginia state laws, such as one prohibiting the use of people’s pictures for purposes of trade without their consent. “Defendant knowingly violated this provision of the Virginia code by using personal data, photographs, and likenesses in the form of pictures and biometric information of Plaintiff and Class members without their written consent for the purposes of trade,” the lawsuit said.
Other allegations include intrusion upon seclusion, negligence, and unjust enrichment. The complaint says Amazon did not compensate class members for the use and retention of their biometric data despite “increased sales due to the Familiar Faces feature of Ring cameras.” It seeks an injunction to change Amazon’s behavior, financial payouts to compensate class members for privacy violations, and disgorgement of profits.
Amazon declined to comment on the lawsuit when contacted by Ars today.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) wrote in November that Ring’s Familiar Faces will scan “many people who have not consented to a face scan, including friends and family, political canvassers, postal workers, delivery drivers, children selling cookies, or maybe even some people passing on the sidewalk.” The EFF said Amazon seems to be “try[ing] to unload some consent requirements onto individual camera owners themselves” with messages reminding customers to comply with applicable laws.
“But Amazon—as a company itself collecting, processing, and storing this biometric data—could have its own consent obligations under numerous laws,” the EFF said, urging regulators to “investigate, protect people’s privacy, and test the strength of their laws.”
US Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) has urged Amazon to discontinue the Familiar Faces feature. Markey sent Amazon a letter in October 2025 asking how Familiar Faces works, and summarized Amazon’s responses in a February 2026 letter that repeated his call to end Familiar Faces.
Markey said that Amazon revealed in its response to his first letter “that Ring’s privacy protections apply only to device owners who may ‘opt in’ to the Familiar Faces feature, while providing no comparable consent mechanism for individuals unknowingly subjected to facial recognition, leaving members of the public with no right to consent to a facial scan and no control over their biometric data.”
According to Markey’s follow-up letter, Amazon also revealed that “individuals seeking deletion of their biometric data [must] request removal from each individual Ring device owner, forcing people to make separate deletion requests for every home they visit,” and “that the number of law enforcement agencies on its Neighbors Public Safety Service has grown from 2,161 in 2022 to 2,723 today.”
Amazon last year introduced an AI-powered “Search Party” feature advertised as being useful for finding lost pets, which led to backlash after a Super Bowl ad. Amazon subsequently ended a deal with Flock Safety that would have sent Ring customer videos to Flock, which is used by police departments.
Ring posed privacy risks before the Familiar Faces and Search Party features were launched. In 2023, the FTC filed a lawsuit accusing Ring of invading users’ privacy by “allowing thousands of employees and contractors to watch video recordings of customers’ private spaces.” Amazon did not admit any wrongdoing but agreed in a settlement to pay $5.8 million for customer refunds, delete certain types of data, and implement privacy and security controls.
---
**İlgili Kaynaklar:**
yapay zeka danışmanlık ve çözüm hizmetleri konusunda [yapay zeka firması](https://yapayzekafirmasi.com) ile iletişime geçebilirsiniz.
