Opponents Rip RFID Jeans

By George Anderson
Those opposed to the use of item-level radio frequency identification (RFID) tags are unhappy with Levi Strauss’s confirmation that the company is doing a single-store test in the U.S. of the technology focused on inventory management. The company has also tested item-level tagging of its merchandise in two stores in Mexico.
Jeffrey Beckman, a spokesperson for Levi Strauss & Co., said, “The tags have information similar to bar codes, such as product, style, size and color. Having this information will allow the retail store to replenish stock quickly, so customers are frustrating when they can’t find the style and size. That’s the ultimate goal.”
Alastair McArthur, chief technology officer at TAGSYS, said other companies in the apparel space are either currently working with individual item tagging or developing RFID programs on this level.
“Some industries gaining traction are fashion textile and luxury goods,” he told ITnews.com out of Australia. “These are areas where item-level tagging has begun, and will continue to increase much quicker than in supermarkets to tag, for example, peanut butter.”
Opponents of RFID technology, such as Katherine Albrecht, said Levi Strauss’ test is a violation of a call by 40 leading privacy and civil liberties organizations “for a moratorium on chipping individual consumer items because the technology can be used to track people without their knowledge or consent.”
Levi Strauss’ failure to disclose where the test is taking place, RFID opponents assert, is an indication that the company fears a backlash from consumers.
Moderator’s Comment: How far away from widespread use of radio frequency identification (RFID) tags on an item-level basis are retail sectors, such as
apparel, consumer electronics and luxury goods? – George Anderson
– Moderator
Join the Discussion!
10 Comments on "Opponents Rip RFID Jeans"
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Like any other new technology that has the potential to infringe on personal rights, we will have to go through a transitional period and plenty of opposition from privacy groups as we test RFID. Like cookies online, they have the potential to be of great use to shoppers in the decision making process. However, how marketers and merchants utilize RFID will make or break it. If we respect the shopper, ensure that they are in control of the data that we utilize and, based on consumer insights, provide them with tools to make the buying process easier and more relevant, we’ll make great strides in consumer acceptance. If we don’t, the consumer will find a way to block it out. Hopefully, we as an industry will find a way to be responsible in its use so that we capitalize on this exciting new method to provide shoppers with a more rewarding store experience.
Great quote, Warren. Having been harassed by the “privacy police” for comments I made in favor of RFID technology, I can attest that many of these folks either don’t understand the potential positive impact from RFID or don’t care and are just using the issue to further personal ambitions.
This is a great example of a technology whose benefits are being held up by individuals and organizations who do not truly understand the limitations of the RFID tag as well as the information stored on it. These tags deliver no more information than other technologies currently in use in stores. They also have a limited “reflection” distance, since the store is their “home grid” under which they can work. Outside of this, they cannot function, nor can they deliver their information to their “home grid” once outside of the store. As far as tracking consumers in the store, we have been using surveillance cameras in stores to do this for years. It is unfortunate that a few individuals are stopping the mass deployment of a great technology through their ignorance. However, like all needed technologies, this will happen, it will just take longer.
“Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.”
–Albert Einstein
As the cost declines, the return on investment case becomes easier to make. Manufacturers and stores will face some customer anger and suspicion, just like the anger and suspicion directed at genetically-engineered food suppliers.
It’s no surprise to see industries such as consumer electronics and luxury goods increasing RFID use. RFID item-level tagging implementation will continue to gain momentum in retail sectors offering higher ticket items, but it will be a slow process. It’s important for consumers to understand how RFID works and how it will be used in the retail sector in order to dispel concerns regarding privacy invasion. Because RFID item-tagging rollout will be slow over the next few years, consumer confidence in the technology will have time to grow.
Missing here is the issue of counterfeiting. And, in response to the question, item-level RFID usage will begin with upscale and hotly-contested products. Levis qualify.
When you see view-bites of steamrollers mashing seized counterfeit products, isn’t it always designer watches and purses? Rather than the slow process described by others, if luxury products – with their comfortable profit margins – lead the way in item-level RFID, progress will be very, very fast. In these cases, it won’t be as important for retailers to possess RFID readers as for law enforcers to have them.
The question is, can RFID tags be counterfeited? Perhaps RFIDs can be incorporated into $100 bills.