3 ms·

GPS trackers were only a form of search [and a violation of the 4th amendment] because they were placed by Government agents if I recall correctly. The collect

GPS trackers were only a form of search [and a violation of the 4th amendment] because they were placed by Government agents if I recall correctly. The collection of GPS records from your phone is still quite legal and this would be the license plate scanning equivalent.

berberous 12y ago
Yes, Jones avoided the hard fourth amendment issues and said, if the government _physically_ places a tracker on your, that is definitely a search. Even in the absence of a trespass, however, Supreme Court precedence recognizes a search when the government violates a subjective expectation of privacy that society recognizes as reasonable. So, if the Government monitors your location by enlisting factory or owner-installed vehicle tracking devices or GPS-enabled smartphones, that could well be a search, but it's still a fuzzy and undecided area of the law. Sotomayor's concurring opinion in U.S. v. Jones is well worth a read if you are interested in this sort of thing.
- lemonlyman87 12y ago
  Yes, the concurrance is fantastic in general, and really hits the nail on the head of why location data needs 4th Amendment protections today: "[Location data] generates a precise, comprehensive record of a person’s public movements that reflects a wealth of detail about her familial, political, professional, religious, and sexual associations ... trips to the psychiatrist, the plastic surgeon, the abortion clinic, the AIDS treatment center, the strip club, the criminal defense attorney, the by-the-hour motel, the union meeting, the mosque, synagogue or church, the gay bar and on and on. The Government can store such recordsand efficiently mine them for information years into the future. And because GPS monitoring is cheapin comparison to conventional surveillance techniques and,by design, proceeds surreptitiously, it evades the ordinary checks that constrain abusive law enforcement practices: limited police resources and community hostility. "Awareness that the Government may be watching chills associational and expressive freedoms. And the Government’s unrestrained power to assemble data that reveal private aspects of identity is susceptible to abuse. The net result is that [location tracking] making available at a relatively low cost such a substantial quantum of intimate information about any person whom the Government, in its unfettered discretion, chooses to track may alter the relationship between citizen and government in a way that is inimical to democratic society.
briandear 12y ago
Could you copyright your license plate and then use a DCMA takedown notice against the private company storing your plate number? Just get a personalized plate; thus you are the 'author' and you've given the state a license to 'publish' your plate. Data mining by a private company of your copyrighted material would not constitute fair use, especially since they are using it for economic gain.
- msandford 12y ago
  I doubt it because the text is too small to be copyrightable I suspect. Otherwise I'd just copyright a bunch of individual words and then make everyone stop writing or talking at all. But it's a nice idea!
kd5bjo 12y ago
I suspect the issue here would be the requirement to place a tracking device (license plate) on your vehicle, not the installation of detectors for that device.

berberous 12y ago

Yes, Jones avoided the hard fourth amendment issues and said, if the government _physically_ places a tracker on your, that is definitely a search. Even in the absence of a trespass, however, Supreme Court precedence recognizes a search when the government violates a subjective expectation of privacy that society recognizes as reasonable. So, if the Government monitors your location by enlisting factory or owner-installed vehicle tracking devices or GPS-enabled smartphones, that could well be a search, but it's still a fuzzy and undecided area of the law. Sotomayor's concurring opinion in U.S. v. Jones is well worth a read if you are interested in this sort of thing.

lemonlyman87 12y ago
Yes, the concurrance is fantastic in general, and really hits the nail on the head of why location data needs 4th Amendment protections today: "[Location data] generates a precise, comprehensive record of a person’s public movements that reflects a wealth of detail about her familial, political, professional, religious, and sexual associations ... trips to the psychiatrist, the plastic surgeon, the abortion clinic, the AIDS treatment center, the strip club, the criminal defense attorney, the by-the-hour motel, the union meeting, the mosque, synagogue or church, the gay bar and on and on. The Government can store such recordsand efficiently mine them for information years into the future. And because GPS monitoring is cheapin comparison to conventional surveillance techniques and,by design, proceeds surreptitiously, it evades the ordinary checks that constrain abusive law enforcement practices: limited police resources and community hostility. "Awareness that the Government may be watching chills associational and expressive freedoms. And the Government’s unrestrained power to assemble data that reveal private aspects of identity is susceptible to abuse. The net result is that [location tracking] making available at a relatively low cost such a substantial quantum of intimate information about any person whom the Government, in its unfettered discretion, chooses to track may alter the relationship between citizen and government in a way that is inimical to democratic society.

briandear 12y ago

Could you copyright your license plate and then use a DCMA takedown notice against the private company storing your plate number? Just get a personalized plate; thus you are the 'author' and you've given the state a license to 'publish' your plate. Data mining by a private company of your copyrighted material would not constitute fair use, especially since they are using it for economic gain.

msandford 12y ago
I doubt it because the text is too small to be copyrightable I suspect. Otherwise I'd just copyright a bunch of individual words and then make everyone stop writing or talking at all. But it's a nice idea!

kd5bjo 12y ago

I suspect the issue here would be the requirement to place a tracking device (license plate) on your vehicle, not the installation of detectors for that device.