GPS Ruling Shakes Up Privacy Activists

VIP LOUNGE

CLOUD LOGIN

You are here: News > News > GPS Ruling Shakes Up Privacy Activists

» IT Security NEWS

» 10 May 2009

GPS Ruling Shakes Up Privacy Activists

Not everyone has warmed up to the benefits and advantages of GPS (Global Positioning System) technology, but the once fictional and speculative tracking device will soon be used the way it was envisioned to be used in many a Dick Tracy comic strip or future-based movie.

For many people in America, GPS is best used when driving into unknown parts of the U.S. Then again, there are also those who aren't keen on following directions from a computer voice. For them, it is too reminiscent of 1984's Big Brother (not the Reality TV Show) or even HAL 9000 from Arthur C. Clark's 2001: A Space Odyssey. Robots really are taking over nowadays, as childish a fear as that may sound.

All the same, many supporters of personal privacy and the Fifth Amendment were probably shocked and scandalized over a Wisconsin court's decision to grant local law enforcement the authority to stick GPS tracking devices on anyone they find suspicious without the need of a search warrant.

The Fourth District U.S. Court of Appeals wasn't very enthusiastic over its own decision, ironically enough. However, after much debate and reflection, the court ultimately decided that GPS technically has nothing to do with seizing and searching. For instance, any information gained through GPS monitoring on someone's vehicle is equivalent to the information taken from a standard surveillance camera.

The decision came about because of the case against Michael Sveum, a resident of Madison accused of stalking. The police was able to get court approval to slip a GPS tracking device on the man's car. Sveum's lawyers contended that this act violated their client's Fourth Amendment Rights that safeguarded him from unwarranted seizure and search by authorities. They further argued that he was being followed out of the public view and in private places such as his garage.

The court disagreed with these contentions, declaring that the police could have used their eyes to see when Sveum entered and exited his garage. The ruling seems to state that an officer has the freedom to track a "suspicious" person's every move and action by strapping a GPS on the chassis of his car. Such an example may sound outlandish and extreme, but it clearly illustrates the unfortunate implications of this ruling.

Larry Dupuis, legal director of the ACLU in Wisconsin, is one among many troubled by the aforementioned implications of the ruling. He recently confessed to the Chicago Tribune that being able to fasten anything on anyone's property without supervision from the courts is abusive. The lack of a warrant for GPS tracking will serve as a carte blanche for law enforcement to "do this on anybody they want."