BathOS: We've heard of it. Your mobile phone works while you are bathing
|
|
|
Privacy groups fight GPS tracking
A COALITION of privacy groups in the US has taken the fight against warrantless GPS tracking to the US Supreme Court.
The coalition has enlisted the inventor of GPS to support its case, and has asked the US Supreme Court to block the government from tracking individuals without a warrant.
They argue that gathering information through the use of GPS tracking needs legal oversight, and warn that without oversight governments will collect a "massive collection of sensitive location data".
Roger Easton, described as the father of GPS and the principal inventor and developer of the Timation Satellite Navigation System, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) have filed an amicus brief with the US Supreme Court. In it they argue that GPS tracking is more invasive than other methods of surveillance and that allowing its use without a warrant violates "reasonable expectations of privacy".
"This is the first case where the Supreme Court will consider automatic, persistent, passive location tracking by law enforcement," said EFF senior staff attorney Marcia Hofmann.
"The government can use location information over time to learn where you go to church, what sort of doctors you go to, what meetings and activities you participate in, and much more. Police should not have blanket permission to install GPS devices and collect detailed information about people's movements over time without court review."
The brief relates to a case called United States v. Jones that saw agents place a GPS device on a car while it was on private property. A US appeals court has already ruled that surveillance was unconstitutional without a warrant, but the government appealed the decision.
"If police are allowed to plant GPS devices wherever they please, that's essentially blanket permission for widespread, ongoing police surveillance without any court supervision," said EFF legal director Cindy Cohn.
"It's not hard to see how that kind of leeway would be abused. We hope the Supreme Court takes a close look at how this technology works and act to protect the Fourth Amendment rights of Americans." µ
Tags: Security
Share this:
Share
“Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Ben Franklin
Translation for the clueless - if you are dumb enough to buy the argument that it is good for you, you are dumb enough to have big-bro put their thumb up your rear-end.
This is a reaction on people who found that after posting normal opinions on forums or being relatives of people who did there was a GPS device attached underneath their car,.
So yes the feds do track average people, in fact by making your remark they could be tracking your car right now (assuming you aren't a fed yourself and assuming you are old enough to drive)
And once again: define 'wrong', I'm sure that what you do I would define as wrong, so if I got in power or was CIA could I execute you with a drone? After all, who would care anyway? And you did something 'wrong'.
okay Gutzman, lets say tracking is approved for everyone. Now that all cell phones act as GPS devices, some criminal that works in a security company/gov dept, starts looking for opportunity:when nobodies home, when someones home alone, to commit their crime of choice. Gangs/Mafia hack in and start tracking where police are to elude or murder.
That's just to give you heads up on some of the abuse that will happen.
SO if you dont have anything to hide, then get over yourself. Seriously you people think you are so important that the gov't wants to and needs to track you? How about someone who was seen/identified at a crime, Looking at his history will tell law enforcement where they should look to find him if not getting a live stream.
So if you are not doing anything wrong, Why does it matter? Benefits far outweigh the negatives.