I think there was a case in the courts where they ruled that they didn't need a warrant to slap a gps unit on your vehicle. This was within the ast year or 2 if I remember correctly. I don't know if there was any subsequent rules that may have countered that...i doubt it.
------------------------------------ Three Ravens Consulting Eric Roberts Owner/Developer ow...@threeravensconsulting.com tel: 630-486-5255 fax: 630-310-8531 http://www.threeravensconsulting.com ------------------------------------ -----Original Message----- From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 4:48 PM To: cf-community Subject: Re: I suspected facebook I'd have to look at the article to see how recent it is. Last I looked (a couple of months ago admittedly) a warrant was required for to put s GPS device on a car, but not to track a cell phone you carry with you voluntarily, in the overwhelming majority of cases, with the GPS enabled. If that's changed, then good. But the trend does not seem to be in the direction of greater privacy protections. On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:10 AM, Casey Dougall - Uber Website Solutions < ca...@uberwebsitesolutions.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Dana <dana.tier...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > cell phone tower tracking is so 2010. Only accurate to within a > > hundred yards or so. GPS can pinpoint your location no not only > > which store but also which aisle. Sadly enough, I'm not joking. > > > > > Not exactly... They can but still need a warrant, cell phone tower > data is a different story; they are trying to get away without one. > > http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/08/warrantless-gps-phone-trackin > g/ > > Responding to the Jones decision, the FBI has pulled the plug on 3,000 > GPS-tracking devices, and is seeking to introduce cell-site data, > obtained without a warrant< > https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ > feds-move-to-cell-site-data/&sa=U&ei=DJ4qUOPiK-Hs0gHapICAAQ&ved=0CAYQF > jAA&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNHjDBUng-FPHQZ9kB48P49m2U8xwg > >, > in a bid to keep Jones in prison. > > Wednesday's ruling wasn't unanimous on all counts, however. > > Judge Bernice Donald upheld the conviction, based on the police's > "good faith' exemption" to the warrant requirement. But Donald wrote > that the majority was wrong in its theory of the case. > > I would not characterize the question before us as whether society is > prepared to recognize a legitimate expectation of privacy in the GPS > data emitted from a cell phone used to effectuate drug trafficking. > Rather, in keeping with the principle that the law affords the same > constitutional protections to criminals and law-abiding citizens > alike, the question is simply whether society is prepared to recognize > a legitimate expectation of privacy in the GPS data emitted from any > cell phone. Because I would answer this question in the affirmative, I > cannot join Part II.A of the majority opin > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:353886 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
