Uniqlo, do you still want a bit of face?

Are consumers really gods? Let’s see how Uniqlo views this? Recently, some Uniqlo stores were accused of 'secretly filming' consumers to prevent theft. On social media, some consumers reported feeling uncomfortable at Uniqlo for being treated as 'thieves'. A reporter from Jiupai Finance found that Uniqlo is not very willing to invest in high technological costs, but the headquarters sets a 'LOSS rate' indicator, which affects the management levels above store managers. This has led some store managers to issue requirements to 'secretly film suspicious individuals', even turning theft prevention into a quantitative indicator of 'how many photos to take in a day'.

This is treating consumers like 'thieves'. By the way, do good and bad people wear labels on their faces? Can this method really catch bad people? Isn’t it more likely to capture innocent consumers? Article 14 of the Consumer Rights Protection Law states: 'Consumers have the right to dignity, respect for ethnic customs and habits when purchasing, using goods, and receiving services, and the right to have personal information protected by law.' The act of Uniqlo stores assuming entering customers are thieves and filming them is a serious violation of customer personality rights.

Consumers come to the store to experience joy, not to suffer, and not to be pointed at from behind. Does Uniqlo still have a basic sense of service? Uniqlo, do you still want a bit of face? According to reports, some stores, under the guise of 'theft prevention', subjectively label consumers as 'No. 11' (the internal term for suspicious individuals) and upload photos to a corporate group with hundreds of people for 'wanted lists'. This behavior pre-sets consumers as potential lawbreakers, depriving them of their equal status as ordinary customers and constituting a violation of dignity. Uniqlo's actions infringe on multiple personality rights of consumers.

Infringement of portrait rights: Without consumer consent, obtaining facial, body shape, and other biometric information through monitoring screenshots or covert filming and disseminating this information violates Article 1019 of the Civil Code regarding 'the image rights of individuals cannot be made, used, or publicly disclosed without the consent of the portrait right holder.' Infringement of privacy rights: If the filming scope includes fitting rooms, sensitive body parts, or tracking the entire activities of consumers, it directly infringes on the privacy rights defined in Article 1032 of the Civil Code regarding 'the tranquility of private life' and 'private space, private activities, and private information'. Infringing on personal information rights: According to Article 44 of the Personal Information Protection Law, 'individuals have the right to know and decide on the processing of their personal information, and have the right to limit or refuse others from processing their personal information; unless otherwise stipulated by laws and administrative regulations.' Uniqlo stores collecting and storing photos without consent infringe on the aforementioned rights of consumers. Article 23 of the Implementation Regulations of the Consumer Rights Protection Law states: 'Operators must legally protect consumers' personal information. When providing goods or services, operators must not excessively collect consumers' personal information, nor use one-time generalized authorization or default authorization methods to force or indirectly force consumers to agree to collect or use personal information that is not directly related to business activities.

Operators processing sensitive personal information, including consumers' biometric data, religious beliefs, specific identities, medical health, financial accounts, and tracking information, as well as personal information of minors under the age of fourteen, must comply with relevant laws and administrative regulations.' The covert filming behavior of Uniqlo stores constitutes illegal collection of consumer personal information. According to Article 179 of the Civil Code, Uniqlo must bear responsibilities such as stopping the infringement, eliminating the impact, apologizing, and compensating for losses.

Consumers can demand that stores delete photos, issue public apologies, and claim compensation for reputational damage and mental distress. Furthermore, if the covert filming infringes on others' privacy, it may also violate Article 42 of the Public Security Administration Punishment Law, facing detention of less than five days or fines of less than five hundred yuan; in more severe cases, detention of more than five days and less than ten days may be imposed, along with fines of less than five hundred yuan.

In addition to the above legal responsibilities, according to Article 56 of the Consumer Rights Protection Law, 'violations of consumers' dignity, personal freedom, or rights to personal information legally protected,' administrative departments for industry and commerce or other relevant administrative departments can order corrections, and may issue warnings, confiscate illegal gains, or impose fines of more than one to ten times the illegal gains; if there are no illegal gains, fines of less than five hundred thousand yuan may be imposed;

for serious cases, orders for business suspension, rectification, or revocation of business licenses may be issued. I suggest that relevant departments take a look at Uniqlo and impose fines of less than five hundred thousand yuan. If there are no fines, it shows disrespect. At the same time, Uniqlo must immediately stop all infringing actions, publicly apologize, and commit to establishing a legal and compliant theft prevention mechanism, strengthening employee training, optimizing the use standards of monitoring equipment, etc. If Uniqlo is unwilling to apologize or rectify, consumers should vote with their feet and stay away from Uniqlo, and not let them take advantage of our goodwill.