One of the advantages of living in an area with spotty cell phone coverage is that apparently I'm safe from tracking (the phone is off 80% of the time - and only used for trips into the city - when we remember it.)
Us rural hicks have are lucky.
Also, being Canadian - this court case doesn't affect me. However, I wish I knew what the laws were here... I'll have to do some research to see if I can post a smug follow up post, 'cause I don't know that we can be smug about this... hmmm...
Like most modern Americans, I am generally never more than an arm’s-length reach from my cellular phone. That means there’s often a very high correlation between the location of a cell phone and the location of its owner.
Government investigators have apparently found this correlation quite valuable, and have engaged in a number of cases where they used cell phone location data to track and/or prosecute American citizens.
The interesting issue here is whether the government had the right to get at that data. The feds contended that since location data is normally held at the carrier, citizens don’t have an expectation of privacy with regard to location.
Rather than seeking a judge’s permission to get at the data, the equivalent of asking for a search warrant, law enforcement officials merely demanded phone location data from carriers and were given it.
The implications for privacy and due process are clearly apparent.
See also: I just want to give the EFF a great, big smootchy-smootch!
Our friends at the Electronic Frontier Foundation were all over the cell phone tracking debate, and yesterday, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia ruled courts may require search warrants for cell phone location records.
This is a huge win for privacy advocates.
Now, to be clear, this ruling doesn’t say the courts MUST require warrants, but it does — at least — give judges the option if they feel it’s, um, warranted.
Good job, EFF!
What does your phone know about you that you wouldn’t want anyone to know about? Tell all below!
