Friday, October 19, 2007

Is Where You Were Private!

Bruce Cahan forwarded me this article written by a colleague of his. It discusses a recent Massachusetts's case in which the government was seeking a court order to require companies to release historical cell site information. One of the primary issues was whether a warrant was required to obtain historical information. (Many, although certainly not all courts, have found that a warrant is required in order to track a person's movements real-time using cell phone data.) The Massachusetts's judge found that a warrant was not required in this case, and that all the government needed to show was that the historical information of a person's movements was relevant to an ongoing investigation.

You will have a good understanding of how complicated of an issue this is after reading the article and the case. I particularly liked the quote from the article about the inability of courts and legislatures to deal with the impact of technology.

Monday, October 1, 2007

Spatial Law News

Spatial Law related articles:

Article from a UK newspaper that suggests that satellite navigation devices may result in an increase chance for automobile accidents. Data providers as well as hardware manufacturers should follow this closely.

NYC taxi cab drivers lose first round of fight to prevent implementation of a city rule requiring installation of GPS devices. According to the article, the judge stated that the value of the service outweighed the cab driver's privacy concerns. If this quote is accurate, it is an innovative approach to privacy matters and raises a number questions.

Congressional Quarterly reports the delay of the start of the National Applications Office within the Department of Homeland Security. According to the article, one of the reasons is to give Congress time to learn more about the program with respect to privacy concerns.