Flock CEO: We haven’t ‘fired’ any police departments as customers

Your police department might still be using Flock cameras even if some officers abused them.

Flock CEO Garrett Langley stated at the Disrupt 2026 conference that the company has not terminated any contracts with police departments despite widespread reports of abuse of its license plate reader systems. Langley clarified that while Flock would immediately cease business with any customer knowingly breaking the law, the company has not yet "fired" any clients, even when isolated incidents of misuse by officers have occurred. He explained that the decision to potentially end a contract is nuanced, especially if only a few out of many officers are implicated. Flock operates over 100,000 cameras across the U.S., creating a national database of license plate detections that some law enforcement agencies use to track vehicles beyond their jurisdictions. The company has faced significant public backlash and protests due to privacy concerns and the misuse of its technology, leading some communities to cancel their contracts.

The CEO’s insistence on not severing ties with departments experiencing isolated misuse highlights a tension between public privacy concerns and law enforcement’s perceived need for surveillance tools. This stance suggests Flock prioritizes maintaining its customer base, even at the risk of further public outcry, indicating a market where data privacy is frequently negotiated against security claims. This puts pressure on communities and lawmakers to actively push for transparency and accountability from both law enforcement agencies and their technology providers. Watch for increased legislative efforts to regulate the use and oversight of license plate reader data nationwide.

Flock's position implies that individual accountability for data misuse may not lead to systemic contract cancellations, potentially entrenching the use of its technology despite ongoing controversies. This approach could embolden other surveillance technology companies to adopt similar stances, creating a precedent for how data abuse allegations are handled within the sector. Citizens concerned about mass surveillance will likely need to focus on local policy changes and advocacy to influence departmental adoption and continued use of Flock cameras, as company-level action appears unlikely without significant legal repercussions.