Introduction:In March 2023, Heytea, a well-known new tea beverage brand, became embroiled in a public controversy after it was revealed that some of its stores had installed facial recognition cameras supplied by Wandozhang. This incident drew widespread attention to privacy and security concerns in consumer spaces. This article details the sequence of events, responses from the involved companies, and delves into the legal and ethical boundaries of facial recognition technology use, helping you understand how to protect your personal information during everyday consumption.
On March 16, 2023, Heytea quickly trended on Weibo due to discussions surrounding the installation of Wandozhang facial recognition cameras in its stores. The incident originated from the March 15 CCTV 315 Gala, which exposed over 20 well-known brands—including Heytea, Kohler Sanitary Ware, and BMW—for illegally collecting customers' facial data through camera systems provided by Wandozhang, all without the consumers’ knowledge or consent.
Following the exposure, Heytea promptly responded, emphasizing that the Wandozhang cameras installed in its stores were used solely for security footage and that there had been no illegal collection of customers’ facial data. However, this explanation did not fully alleviate public concerns. Many netizens commented: “This is blatant privacy invasion—it must be removed, or who would dare patronize such businesses?” and “That’s terrifying—now even buying a cup of milk tea feels like a privacy risk.”
According to the CCTV report, Heytea was not the only brand implicated. Over 20 other well-known brands and institutions, including Kohler Sanitary Ware, BMW, and the Jiangsu Grand Theatre, were also named. The cameras installed in these locations could automatically capture customers’ facial images upon entry, assign them an ID number, and record their behavior—such as which brand store they entered and how many times they visited—all without notifying or informing the consumers.
Among them, the renowned sanitary ware brand Kohler Sanitary Ware was singled out for allegedly collecting customers’ facial data without permission through facial recognition cameras installed in thousands of its stores across the country, making it a primary focus of the 315 Gala exposé. After the incident broke, Kohler Sanitary Ware urgently dismantled the related surveillance equipment overnight and publicly apologized to consumers.
Further investigation revealed that Wandozhang Network Technology Co., Ltd., the supplier of these cameras, had accumulated hundreds of millions of facial data entries on its platform. Zhu Youwen, co-founder of Wandozhang, responded that the company was drafting a public announcement to clarify its business scope and specific corrective measures. Zhou Shengqiang, the founder, emphasized that the company only assists clients with operational analysis and that the related facial data would neither be leaked nor retained long-term.
According to information from the Wandozhang official website, besides Kohler Sanitary Ware, its client list also includes well-known brands such as JOMOO, TATA Wooden Doors, Dongyi Risheng, IKEA, and others, spanning sectors such as pharmaceuticals, footwear and apparel, catering, FMCG, home furnishings, and digital products. Official data shows that Wandozhang was established in April 2016 as a remote store supervision service platform, offering services such as remote video store inspections, foot traffic statistics, and hotspot analysis. To date, it has completed two rounds of financing: in June 2017, it received 15 million yuan in Series A funding from GSR Ventures, and in May 2020, it announced the completion of 80 million yuan in Series B funding, led by DTC Capital with additional investments from Yuanhai Minghua and Suzhou High-Tech, along with credit lines totaling 50 million yuan from several banks.
It is worth noting that, according to the Personal Information Security Specification issued by China’s State Administration for Market Regulation, the collection of sensitive biometric information such as facial data must obtain explicit authorization and consent from the individual concerned. Facial data, as a unique biological characteristic, is already widely used in scenarios such as access control, transit ticketing, and facial payment. While it brings convenience to daily life, if such data is illegally collected or leaked—and since facial features cannot be easily changed like passwords—it poses a serious threat to personal property and privacy security.
The Heytea facial recognition controversy serves as yet another reminder that while we enjoy the operational efficiency and consumption convenience brought by technology, we must also pay greater attention to balancing legal boundaries and the protection of personal information. For consumers, understanding common surveillance technology applications and one's own rights is an essential aspect of privacy protection in modern life.
The above content is compiled by CoffeeHunters, a coffee news website.
