The Australian Open (AO) has rolled out facial recognition technology for all visitors under a new addition to its conditions of entry.

By purchasing a ticket or entering Melbourne Park for this year’s competition, which runs between 6 and 26 January, visitors acknowledge security cameras “that may incorporate facial recognition technology” are used to “enhance security and patron safety” in and around tournament grounds.

The technology, which was not accounted for in last year’s terms, has sparked concerns from some attendees and privacy experts.

An AO attendee told Information Age that despite having purchased a ticket and entered the event, they were not aware they had consented to the technology.

“We definitely didn't read the terms and conditions of the tickets — who does?” they said.

“We weren't aware of any of this.”

Separate to the new surveillance tech, event organiser Tennis Australia has also introduced opt-in software to facilitate faster queuing at AO entry gates.

Provided by US-based company Wicket, the program enables patrons to skip long queues by uploading a selfie and linking it to their Ticketmaster account, which can in turn be used for facial scanning at Melbourne Park.

Wicket chief operating officer Jeff Boehm told Nine pictures taken by the software were converted into a “mathematical representation”, which was then stored in a secure cloud system owned by Tennis Australia.

Information Age asked Tennis Australia how long it kept any collected data and whether it was used for purposes other than enabling faster entrance to the AO, but did not receive a response by press time.

Dubious consent for surveillance tech

Monash University professor Mark Andrejevic told Information Age the adoption of facial recognition surveillance technology pointed to a larger issue around consent.

“What's happening is very similar to what takes place online: somewhere, nestled in a thicket of verbiage that you have to agree to, is the fact that you're consenting to being scanned,” he said.

“But what's your choice? If you want to go to the tennis, you have to agree to the terms.

“I don't think this counts as meaningful consent, and since the terms don't say how long Tennis Australia is going to keep the images or what they might do with them down the road, it's not really informed consent either.”


Australian Open organisers are also using facial recognition tech from Wicket, seen here being used in the US, to speed up event entry. Photo: Wicket / Supplied

The conditions of entry note that alongside CCTV, facial recognition technology may be used to help identify and eject persons who have been denied entry to the AO, including for the sake of safety, security or the “integrity” of the event.

While the technology may also be used for law enforcement purposes and contact tracing at the tournament, Andrejevic suggested organisations were increasingly adopting facial recognition tools as a means of data harvesting.

“It's becoming pretty clear that entities of all kinds want to use facial recognition — it's in keeping with the goal of vacuuming up as much data as possible,” he said.

First Bunnings, now the tennis

The AO’s adoption of facial recognition technology comes just months after hardware giant Bunnings was found to have breached Australians’ privacy by collecting sensitive information through similar measures.

At the time, Privacy Commissioner Carly Kind said use of the technology disproportionately interfered with the privacy of everyone who entered Bunnings stores.

Facing nationwide blowback, Bunnings shared a collection of CCTV showing attacks against its staff, with managing director Mike Schneider arguing facial recognition was a “really important asset” for preventing in-store violence.

Notably, the commissioner alleged Bunnings had collected individuals’ information without consent, while the AO has explicitly garnered attendee permission via the tournament’s new entry terms.

Andrejevic suggested that because facial recognition technology is “becoming cheaper and more powerful”, companies will be more likely to adopt it.

“Unless we get some kind of dedicated legislation governing the use of the technology — or some specific provisions in the revamp of the Privacy Act — we can expect this to become the new normal in a lot of venues,” he said.