re Justice Department pushes for tracking of cell phone locations

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: lynn <lynn () ecgincc com>
> Date: February 11, 2010 11:25:25 AM EST
> To: dave () farber net
> Cc: declan () well com
> Subject: Re: [IP] Justice Department pushes for tracking of cell  
> phone locations

> Based on my personal experience location information is up to the  
> minute
> and specific. In this state it can be used for a medical emergency  
> with no
> problem. For a crime, it cannot be used without jepordizing a
> possible/probable conviction. A judges order is required for either.  
> Where
> does that leave fourth ammendment rights?
>
> Lynn
>
>
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
> > Date: February 11, 2010 10:55:38 AM EST
> > To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
> > Subject: Justice Department pushes for tracking of cell phone  
> > locations
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > IPers might enjoy this preview of a case involving cell phone  
> > location
> > tracking that will be before the Third Circuit in Philadelphia on  
> > Friday:
> > http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10451518-38.html
> >
> > This is an unsettled area of the law, and the Third Circuit will be  
> > the
> > first federal appeals court to address it.
> >
> > The issues around cell phone location tracking include what legal
> > procedures are required to track the retrospective (historical)  
> > locations
> > of mobile devices vs. their prospective (future) locations -- when  
> > is a
> > search warrant required, for instance?
> >
> > There's also the tantalizing Fourth Amendment question of whether
> > Americans enjoy a reasonable expectation of privacy in their location
> > records (which, as a magistrate judge in Pittsburgh noted, can reveal
> > sensitive information such as health treatments, financial  
> > difficulties,
> > marital counseling, and extra-marital affairs).
> >
> > The Justice Department says "no" -- here's an excerpt from its brief:
> > "Because wireless carriers regularly generate and retain the  
> > records at
> > issue, and because these records provide only a very general  
> > indication of
> > a user’s whereabouts at certain times in the past, the requested c 
> > ell-site
> > records do not implicate a Fourth Amendment privacy interest."
> >
> > -Declan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------
> > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
> > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
> > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com