By Jo Best, 24 September 2004 17:05
NEWS One clothing maker is planning to put RFID tracking tags on all its products from 2005 - but just who is the mystery shop?
At the Frontline Expo in Chicago, a tag firm told Consumer organisation Caspian (Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering) that a US retailer was planning the huge tagging drive but wouldn't put a name to it.
Like Marks and Spencer before it, the organisation will put the RFID chips in tags attached to the clothes. Caspian has managed to get some shots of the tags in question and members have been scratching their collective heads over who the garment maker could be.
In the frame, according to Caspian, are famous undies maker Calvin Klein, sports clothing company Champion and trendy youth brand Abercrombie & Fitch.
The retailer in question doesn't want their RFID plans publicised, however. At Checkpoint's stand at the Expo, both Calvin Klein and Champion had sample clothing labels with RFID tags incorporated.
Another chipped clothing tag was on display but with the company's name blacked out - evidence, perhaps, of an unwillingness to be associated with RFID tracking technology.
Although the company's name had been blacked out, a logo was still visible - that of Abercrombie & Fitch.
However, a spokesman for Checkpoint has subsquently claimed any items seen on the stand were purely for "display purposes".
A spokeswoman for Abercrombie & Fitch told silicon.com the company "cannot confirm or deny" it plans to roll out RFID in its clothes by 2005.
Katherine Albrecht, director of Caspian, said the precedents set by fellow clothes seller Benetton should serve as a warning.
"It can be hard to win back customer trust once you've crossed the RFID line," she said in a statement.
Comments
There are 6 comments. Join the discussion
1. Raymond Rose
If Abercrombie, Calvin, P&G, or any other retailer crosses the RFID line I will boycott them and won't stop until they're no longer viable companies. I'm a 23 year old college senior who's a business major, who's just starting on my masters.
My (colege) friends all agree with me that this RFID stuff is Bull$#!t. If they cross the RFID line they'll not only piss older generations, they'll piss of the next generation.
Lets see them face both the current and future generations of consumer and survive.
Heck, I'd even see if I could talk my financial contacts (teachers, fellow Masters Financial students who are Raytmond James gurus, ect)into selling shorting them and basically doing whatever they can to hurt them.
Point is, if they cross the RFID line, not only will the consumers turn against them, the people who run the market will turn against them.
Who wants their suit, underwear, or even shampoo to shout out, "HERE I AM!"???? NOT ME and not anyone I know.
2. anonymous
Mr. Rose and his friends should do more research on RFID besides just reading and reacting to the CASPIAN "spy chip" bias.
The new RFID tags being developed will have a "kill" feature that will render the tag's internal codes non-functional. As a consumer, you would be given a choice of having the tags "killed" when you leave the retailer.
If Rose and group thinks that somehow people will be able to track a person by tags in clothing, how about all of them (and all CAPSIAN members too) buying clothes with (non-"killed") tags and then swapping the items with other. Do this enough times and any database "tracking" system would be seriously compromised.
Since the passive RFID tag has a very limited range (several feet depending on frequency, antenna size and reader power), to really track a person, there would need to be readers every 50 feet or so. (Satellites can not track RFID tags... something about the laws of physics).
All of those millions of readers would need to report their data to one system. Just to track a sweater that belongs to someone else?
Think about it (hard)-- the fears about RFID doe not make sense. CASPIAN is jerking your chain.
If you want to track someone, the RTLS (Real Time Location System) tag would be much better suited. It can fix a location within 300 feet and uses GPS. Of course, the RTLS tags cost over $400 and are much larger than RFID tags. I don't think they will fit in a sweater.
Personally, I too have concerns about privacy.
Unless we lived under a totalitarian dictatorship where you could be given (injected with) an RFID tag instead of a tatooed bar code or serial number, I think the flap over about RFID is overblown.
I oppose ADSX and its concept of "chipping" people-- it is repugnant. There has to be a better way resolve the problems with street orphans in Mexico than to inject tags in them for identification purposes. Being "chipped" so you do not have to carry your credit card or ID in Barcelona bars is foolish.
Instead, I look at the positive aspects of RFID tags and their supporting systems: Reduced prices and inventories for goods due to better supply chain management and anti-theft ("shrinkage")applications; tracking of food suppply items to ensure product safety; convenience in travel and anti-collision warning systems; recycling information (i.e. composition) for objects; and many others.
3. rob brooks
am i the only one that notices that people who are for the chip and talk for it always sign anonymous where does all this shit end start with clothes the logical conclusion is people are next to be tracked and traced
4. m.reigel
Mr/Mrs/Ms Anonymous... you miss the intention of RFID. It isn't meant to track *you*, it is meant to track *what you buy*. This will be easy to do, now that we are becoming a cashless society. Hardly anyone uses cash anymore... just whip out the credit card. Or, if you aren't priveleged enough to score well enough for a credit card, fear on... your keepers have arranged the debit card for you. Now, when you check out at the store, your purchases are linked to your card, and on to you.
5. Jason
You are being ignorant. RFID tagging will help lower the costs for retailers to do inventory, which in turn, would mean lower costs for retail items to consumers. RFID tags can be removed after the clothing is purchased and it is not actually part of the garment.
6. anonymous
Jason: That is utter nonsense and you know it. Most people won't even know where to find this miniscule chip.
It is not being used for inventory. It is being used to spy. (Ed note. That's one for the alien conspiracy theorists out there.) It is morally and ethically wrong. It is also very dangerous.
Citizens need to be VERY concerned about this trend in spying.