4 ms·
> a potentially troubling precedent as the court's access to such data increases. This is just fear-mongering. The court only has access to this data because t
by jack-r-abbit 12y ago
> a potentially troubling precedent as the court's access to such data increases.
This is just fear-mongering. The court only has access to this data because the owner of the data has brought it to the court as evidence in their case.
- gwern 12y agoMaybe you should've read down further to the part where it addresses the ability of the opposing side to get court orders for such data in the future, and precedent.
- 001sky 12y agothis is wrong. you publish this stuff online, its fair game. many fitness apps are basically trackers. For example, popular cross-country running and mtb routes? very often these are in contested use sights. runners/hikers/bikers/horse rider hate each other (at least in CA) and private landowners loath them all too (as tresspassers) meanwhile state and federal agents have a vested interest in protecting their access/permit monopolies. You can be assured that at some stage litigants in these disputes will bring any and all evidence like this forward-- if/when it suits a litigation brief.
- drewvolpe 12y agoIf it becomes used regularly, prosecutors will be able to subpoena it from any user (as they do today with email and phone records).