As much as sports fans like to fly their allegiances loud and proud, vie for attention on jumbotrons during sporting events, and would like to be recognized by their favorite teams, they probably aren’t keen on Madison Square Garden breaching their privacy, as an unlawful discrimination and wrongful termination suit brought by a former employee alleges. 

Former Madison Square Garden Entertainment Corporation (MSGEC) vice president of shared security services Donald Ingrasselino says, among other things, MSG used facial recognition technology to target personal enemies, which “included MSG venue guests, lawyers, customers and sports fans who articulated frustration with team losses, chanting for [MSGEC owner James Dolan] to sell the Knicks, or simply using foul language.”  

In the suit filed in the Southern District of New York, Ingrasselino claims he was fired in retaliation after challenging the privacy-flaunting and other security practices spearheaded by MSG Chief Security Officer John Eversole and was a target of disability discrimination, which is at the heart of the lawsuit. 

According to the filing, “Ingrasselino pushed back against assignments he and his team were given to conduct overreaching surveillance of MSG guests, customers, and employees, including directives to take photographs of the individual and their family members, and obtain their social security number and financial information.” 

Among those assignments were blocking a transgender woman from entering MSG simply because of her gender identity and taping phone calls with a woman who was accusing Dolan of sexual assault, the latter of which Ingrasselino refused to do. 

But when he sounded the alarm to some MSG directors about “the blatant and unjustified invasion of these individuals’ privacy,” he eventually found himself without a job. Also of concern was the way the company handled the data it collected — Ingrasselino said no protocols were in place for safe handling. 

He “consistently and repeatedly voiced his concerns to numerous Directors at MSG regarding not only the blatant and unjustified invasion of these individuals’ privacy, but also the lack of appropriate storage and wide dissemination of this highly sensitive information, and lack of protocols with respect to the same,” the complaint said. 

The use of facial recognition technology at the Garden, which claims the surveillance is in place to protect fans, players and the arena, has drawn criticism and protest. MSG has been sued by New York Knicks fans in the past for violation of New York City’s Biometric Identifier Information Code, under which it is illegal to “sell, lease, trade, share in exchange for anything of value or otherwise profit from the transaction of biometric identifier information.” The fans lost in that case. 

And two years ago, an octet of New York lawmakers, including Rep. Jerry Nadler, expressed concern to Dolan about MSG’s use of facial recognition technology. 

“MSG Entertainment is using facial recognition technology against its perceived legal enemies, which is extremely problematic because of the potential to chill free speech and access to the courts,” the lawmakers wrote in a letter. “Also, facial recognition technology has been proven to be inaccurate and discriminatory and can lead to the misuse of personal biometric data without consent. MSG Entertainment must create and adhere to a written policy establishing guidelines for permanently destroying biometric data when the initial purpose of collecting such data has been completed, or within a reasonable time frame, whichever comes first, and we ask that you consider terminating the use of the technology at all, due to its inherent privacy violations and discriminatory outcomes.”  

Deepwatch CISO Chad Cragle calls “Facial recognition is one of those double-edged swords in security.”  

Used responsibly, he says, “it can enhance safety; misused, it quickly erodes trust, invites regulatory backlash and creates real privacy risks.” 

The MSG case “is a reminder that how we use the tech matters just as much as the fact that we can,” says Cagle. “Security leaders must ensure that safeguards, transparency, and oversight are built into the tool; otherwise, it can become a threat or even lead to a lawsuit.”