AMAZON.COM, INC. | Rekognition – Facial Recognition Technology at AMAZON.COM, INC.
How other organisations have declared their voting intentions
| Organisation name | Declared voting intentions | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| EFG Asset Management | For | The company says that the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee has oversight over corporate social responsibility practices, including risks related to human rights and ethical business practices, as well as risks related to operations and engagements with customers, suppliers, and communities, but risks related to facial recognition technology are not specifically mentioned. Amazon clearly prohibits using its services in an unlawful method in its Acceptable Use Policy. Despite the company's assertion that the responsibility for ethical use of facial recognition technology lies with the user, the U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights make clear that the service provider has responsibility to ensure that its technology is not used in instances likely to cause overall harm or in a way that contravenes international law and human rights. Amazon states that it supports and has suggested guidelines for developing governmental regulations around these technologies. The company has established guidelines, and updated them in 2020, for customer use of facial recognition technology, specifically with reference to law enforcement agencies, including human review; a 99 percent confidence score; reliance on the technology as a starting point and not the sole determinant in taking action; transparent use of the technology and safeguards in place; and trained personnel using the technology. It has published additional resources for guidelines on using facial recognition for public safety cases, and in June 2020 announced a one-year moratorium on selling use of Rekognition to law enforcement, to give Congress time to develop regulations around the technology. The company has now indefinitely extended this moratorium. The board also states that Rekognition is an image analysis service, not a surveillance system. Nonetheless, the company's promotion of its facial recognition software to ICE has raised concerns among its employees and the use of the service by law enforcement has caused alarm among some civil and human rights organizations. Amazon has come under scrutiny for its collaboration with other law enforcement agencies, particularly amid increased concern around police brutality and bias in policing, as critics claim that the use of facial recognition technology facilitates increased police surveillance, particularly of people of color. Although Amazon has taken steps to provide its customers with guidelines on using its technological products and services, shareholders and the company are likely to benefit from an independent report on how the company's due diligence process determines whether customers' use of its products or services contributes to human rights violations. The company's decision to indefinitely extend its moratorium indicates that it acknowledges the potential risks associated with its technologies but does not explain what the company will do in the future, especially if Congress does not take steps to enact regulations. Therefore, support for this proposal is warranted. |
| ACTIAM (Delisted) | For | The use of facial recognition technology has the potential risk of facilitating human rights abuses and perpetuating discrimination. Despite some actions from Amazon to address concerns and mitigate some of the risks of misuse, ACTIAM believes shareholders would benefit from an independent study to help understand better the risks associated with it. |
DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.
Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.
Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.