5 ms·

How could it not be? Your plane's location data is just as personal as your car's, or your cellphone's. There's no special aircraft exemption in the GDPR.

by jdong 4y ago

kennywinker 4y ago
A plane is not a person, a phone, a car, or a home. Elon Musk is often the passenger on his jet, but I am quite sure he is often not on board while it moves around.
- jdong 4y ago
  Why would a plane be treated differently than a car in a GDPR context?
  - zimpenfish 4y ago
    > Why would a plane be treated differently than a car in a GDPR context? A car is generally registered to an individual. A plane isn't. You could also -maybe- argue that because there's multiple people on the plane (assuming Ol' Muskie isn't flying it himself) and that those people are potentially different every time, without a passenger and crew manifest, it's not identifying individuals (but I suspect you'd not get far with this.)
    - jdong 4y ago
      Planes are very often registered to individuals, and that doesn't even matter! The plane being company owned doesn't magically change anything, what matters is who's being transported and whether or not they will be easily linked to the aircraft. From a GDPR perspective it also makes no difference whether it's 5% or 90% of planes that are owned by individuals as opposed to by companies.
      - zimpenfish 4y ago
        Do you have some links that support this theory? I'd be interested to read up on it. edit: Specifically mentioning planes and their locations, I mean, not "extrapolating from cars to planes".
        jdong 4y ago
        >edit: Specifically mentioning planes and their locations, I mean, not "extrapolating from cars to planes". You have to be trolling. What leads you to believe that the GDPR which never mentions either aircraft or cars would treat these two kinds of vehicles differently? Can you find anything in the GDPR texts to suggest that cars and planes would be treated differently?
        zimpenfish 4y ago
        > the GDPR which never mentions either aircraft or cars ICO's guide to the UK GDPR does have a specific example of cars being identifiable[1] - "A vehicle’s registration number can be linked to other information held about the registration (eg by the DVLA) to indirectly identify the owner of that vehicle." Nothing about planes though. [2] covers car registrations and explicitly discounts company owned vehicles from being PII - "The registration plates of commercial vehicles are not personal data of an individual as the vehicle is owned by an organisation." All of Ol' Muskie's jets are owned by Falcon Landing LLC, a shell company. [1] https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/what-is-personal-data/can-we-identify-an-individual-indirectly/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio... [2] https://sapphireconsulting.co.uk/is-a-car-registration-plate-my-personal-data/ https://sapphireconsulting.co.uk/is-a-car-registration-plate...
        rosnd 4y ago
        >ICO's guide to the UK GDPR does have a specific example of cars being identifiable[1] - "A vehicle’s registration number can be linked to other information held about the registration (eg by the DVLA) to indirectly identify the owner of that vehicle." Nothing about planes though. Car registration numbers is a very common kind of data for businesses to handle, of course it makes it on the list of examples. Same is not true of planes, of course they don't make it on the list of examples. >[2] covers car registrations and explicitly discounts company owned vehicles from being PII - "The registration plates of commercial vehicles are not personal data of an individual as the vehicle is owned by an organisation." >All of Ol' Muskie's jets are owned by Falcon Landing LLC, a shell company. This doesn't work, you can't wash off PII by tying one aspect of it to an organisation. My phone line might belong to a business, but that doesn't give the carrier a free pass to do whatever they want with associated location data.
mcv 4y ago
I think there's something perverse about the very concept of having a personal plane. Perhaps that's the real issue here.
- jdong 4y ago
  > Perhaps that's the real issue here. I don't see how it could be, that seems like an entirely separate issue.
  - mcv 4y ago
    It's not. If it wasn't his personal plane but a chartered plane or one out of a pool of company planes, this wouldn't be an issue.
    - jdong 4y ago
      Who gives a shit about Elon? What the ADS-B data brokers are doing will continue to be illegal even if Elon never steps on a flight again.
      - _djo_ 4y ago
        Please provide some evidence of your repeated claim that they're illegal in the US and Europe.
        jdong 4y ago
        As far as I can see, nobody here has made any claims regarding anything being illegal in the US. > Please provide some evidence of your repeated claim that they're illegal in Europe https://gdpr-info.eu/ https://gdpr-info.eu/ What kind of evidence do you want exactly? This is crystal clear to anyone with the most basic understanding of the GDPR.
        _djo_ 4y ago
        That’s not evidence. That’s just your opinion, based on your assumption that private aircraft are like private cars under the law. Except that they have never been treated equivalently in any legal venue or government regulation.
monkpit 4y ago
There are services you can pay for (in the US) to track a car’s (almost) real-time location without gps. It’s based upon license plates and widespread webcams and it’s not illegal (yet).
- jdong 4y ago
  Yes, but in the EU this would be illegal. https://www.privacy-ticker.com/decision-to-fine-the-norwegian-public-roads-administration/ https://www.privacy-ticker.com/decision-to-fine-the-norwegia...

How could it not be? Your plane's location data is just as personal as your car's, or your cellphone's. There's no special aircraft exemption in the GDPR.

by jdong 4y ago

How could it not be? Your plane's location data is just as personal as your car's, or your cellphone's. There's no special aircraft exemption in the GDPR.

kennywinker 4y ago

A plane is not a person, a phone, a car, or a home. Elon Musk is often the passenger on his jet, but I am quite sure he is often not on board while it moves around.

jdong 4y ago
Why would a plane be treated differently than a car in a GDPR context?
- zimpenfish 4y ago
  > Why would a plane be treated differently than a car in a GDPR context? A car is generally registered to an individual. A plane isn't. You could also -maybe- argue that because there's multiple people on the plane (assuming Ol' Muskie isn't flying it himself) and that those people are potentially different every time, without a passenger and crew manifest, it's not identifying individuals (but I suspect you'd not get far with this.)
  - jdong 4y ago
    Planes are very often registered to individuals, and that doesn't even matter! The plane being company owned doesn't magically change anything, what matters is who's being transported and whether or not they will be easily linked to the aircraft. From a GDPR perspective it also makes no difference whether it's 5% or 90% of planes that are owned by individuals as opposed to by companies.
    - zimpenfish 4y ago
      Do you have some links that support this theory? I'd be interested to read up on it. edit: Specifically mentioning planes and their locations, I mean, not "extrapolating from cars to planes".
      - jdong 4y ago
        >edit: Specifically mentioning planes and their locations, I mean, not "extrapolating from cars to planes". You have to be trolling. What leads you to believe that the GDPR which never mentions either aircraft or cars would treat these two kinds of vehicles differently? Can you find anything in the GDPR texts to suggest that cars and planes would be treated differently?
        zimpenfish 4y ago
        > the GDPR which never mentions either aircraft or cars ICO's guide to the UK GDPR does have a specific example of cars being identifiable[1] - "A vehicle’s registration number can be linked to other information held about the registration (eg by the DVLA) to indirectly identify the owner of that vehicle." Nothing about planes though. [2] covers car registrations and explicitly discounts company owned vehicles from being PII - "The registration plates of commercial vehicles are not personal data of an individual as the vehicle is owned by an organisation." All of Ol' Muskie's jets are owned by Falcon Landing LLC, a shell company. [1] https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/what-is-personal-data/can-we-identify-an-individual-indirectly/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio... [2] https://sapphireconsulting.co.uk/is-a-car-registration-plate-my-personal-data/ https://sapphireconsulting.co.uk/is-a-car-registration-plate...
        rosnd 4y ago
        >ICO's guide to the UK GDPR does have a specific example of cars being identifiable[1] - "A vehicle’s registration number can be linked to other information held about the registration (eg by the DVLA) to indirectly identify the owner of that vehicle." Nothing about planes though. Car registration numbers is a very common kind of data for businesses to handle, of course it makes it on the list of examples. Same is not true of planes, of course they don't make it on the list of examples. >[2] covers car registrations and explicitly discounts company owned vehicles from being PII - "The registration plates of commercial vehicles are not personal data of an individual as the vehicle is owned by an organisation." >All of Ol' Muskie's jets are owned by Falcon Landing LLC, a shell company. This doesn't work, you can't wash off PII by tying one aspect of it to an organisation. My phone line might belong to a business, but that doesn't give the carrier a free pass to do whatever they want with associated location data.

mcv 4y ago

I think there's something perverse about the very concept of having a personal plane. Perhaps that's the real issue here.

jdong 4y ago
> Perhaps that's the real issue here. I don't see how it could be, that seems like an entirely separate issue.
- mcv 4y ago
  It's not. If it wasn't his personal plane but a chartered plane or one out of a pool of company planes, this wouldn't be an issue.
  - jdong 4y ago
    Who gives a shit about Elon? What the ADS-B data brokers are doing will continue to be illegal even if Elon never steps on a flight again.
    - _djo_ 4y ago
      Please provide some evidence of your repeated claim that they're illegal in the US and Europe.
      - jdong 4y ago
        As far as I can see, nobody here has made any claims regarding anything being illegal in the US. > Please provide some evidence of your repeated claim that they're illegal in Europe https://gdpr-info.eu/ https://gdpr-info.eu/ What kind of evidence do you want exactly? This is crystal clear to anyone with the most basic understanding of the GDPR.
        _djo_ 4y ago
        That’s not evidence. That’s just your opinion, based on your assumption that private aircraft are like private cars under the law. Except that they have never been treated equivalently in any legal venue or government regulation.

monkpit 4y ago

There are services you can pay for (in the US) to track a car’s (almost) real-time location without gps. It’s based upon license plates and widespread webcams and it’s not illegal (yet).

jdong 4y ago
Yes, but in the EU this would be illegal. https://www.privacy-ticker.com/decision-to-fine-the-norwegian-public-roads-administration/ https://www.privacy-ticker.com/decision-to-fine-the-norwegia...