| | |
|
KosukeUenoFirstPaper 3 - 04 May 2017 - Main.KosukeUeno
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
| | | First, the degree of the infringement of privacy is significantly high compared to other traditional investigating method. As long as the police can replace the battery, the GPS tracking device will be available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year to monitor a person’s behavior, which can never be done by individual police officers. | |
<
< | Second, the information captured by GPS investigation could be very sensitive and private. An investigating authority can monitor our location whether we are in private or public places. By collecting the location data, it would enable for police to record all of individual’s data including their hobbies, relationship with others, ideological beliefs and other very sensitive information. | >
> | Second, the information captured by GPS investigation could be very sensitive and private. An investigating authority can monitor our location whether we are in private or public places. By collecting the location data, it would enable for police to record all of individual’s data relating to their hobbies, relationship with others, ideological beliefs and other very sensitive information. | | | | |
<
< | Third, the use of data obtained by GPS devices is often kept in secret. If the investigation authority can use individual’s location data obtained by GPS devices for any purpose and for any period of time only on their discretion, it could mean that legal regulations would not be surpassed. That is because whether it will be used as evidence in criminal trials like this case is uncertain. In fact, a person who is not prosecuted yet have incidentally found a GPS transmitter and filed a civil action against the police. | >
> | Third, the use of data obtained by GPS tracking devices is often kept in secret. If the investigation authority can use individual’s location data obtained by GPS devices for any purpose and for any period of time only on their discretion, it could mean that legal regulations would not be surpassed. That is because whether it will be used as evidence in criminal trials like this case is uncertain. In fact, a person who is not prosecuted yet have incidentally found a GPS transmitter and filed a civil action against the police. | | |
Scope of the Court Decision | |
<
< | The Supreme Court ruled the illegality of the use of GPS devices focusing on the degree of infringement of privacy. However, what was found illegal in this ruling was with respect to acquisition of location information by GPS device by physically attaching it to the car of the suspects, not with respect to acquisition of location information by intervening in the communication means of mobile phone. | >
> | The Supreme Court ruled the illegality of the use of GPS devices focusing on the degree of infringement of privacy. However, what was found illegal in this ruling was with respect to acquisition of location information by GPS device by physically attached to the car of the suspects, not with respect to acquisition of location information by intervening in the communication means of mobile phone. | | | Therefore, although there has been no Supreme Court’s decision yet on the legality of the acquisition of the location information of an individual’s smartphone, it is expected that such investigation will still be legal and possible without obtaining a warrant in the future for the police. |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |