White House Says Feds Should Have Unfettered Access To Mobile Phone Location Info
from the *sigh* dept
Many civil libertarians were hopeful that the Obama administration would be a lot more reasonable on certain issues, like warrantless wiretapping and surveillance of Americans. So far, that hasn't really been the case. The new administration has already sided with the old on the legality of warrantless wiretapping, and is now saying that it shouldn't need a warrant to demand location records from mobile phone providers. This certainly seems like the sort of private info that, under the 4th Amendment, would require a warrant, but not according to the administration(s). It feels that mobile phone providers should freely hand over records of what mobile phone tower any phone was connected to, even without the administration bothering to get a warrant (i.e., whenever and for whomever it wants to keep tabs on). This is tremendously problematic if you believe in the basic principles of the 4th Amendment. The EFF and the ACLU have asked a court to stop this practice, and it's rather disappointing that the administration is pushing in the other direction.






Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
What the hell
BS.
Wont be too long before everyone is fitted with an under the skin GPS device, or better yet - an explosive collar
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Why I don't vote...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
What else...?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Spam spam spam spam
"I see you are near our Starbucks - Come on in and we will treat you to a Grande Mocha Blah Blah"
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I say ok
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I say ok
We already have a legal procedure in place to address that concern: it's called "obtaining a warrant."
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Ok - Cool !
Then you could spell out stuff while driving around.
Most excellent!!!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
What else...?
What else do they think they can demand from us? "Big Brother" will always want an eye everywhere for "Total safety and security." But where do we draw the line? When do we as a people tell the Government that they no longer have the authority to pass such legislature without our permission?
This whole country has gone to shit and we need to fix it as a people and stop relying only on the Government to fix it for us. Yes, that's what they're here for, but the more power we give them, the more power they'll take.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
The moment president Obama finds out that someone at the NSA is tracking his daughters or his wife through their cell phones, he'll change his mind pretty quick. Similar things have happened here in Portugal and in Italy. Governments approved relaxed rules for phone tapping and the jailing of defendants while waiting trial, but then rushed to limit it when it was actually used on public officials and politicians.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
for car insurance companies .... so they can charge you more
"The moment president Obama finds out that someone"
There will be a list of those not to be tracked
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I say ok
I'm starting to think his legacy is going to be remembered as the administration that took the office of the Presidency to new heights of dishonesty and corruption. He's just getting warmed up.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I say ok
Do you really think He can out do his predecessors ?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
It always amazes me that some people don't seem to realize that.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: I say ok
He can try, and he's getting off to a good start.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What else...?
They are a lot more than that. And they are well armed.
"We have forgotten that we LET these people run our lives."
We LET them because they force us. I'm far more afraid of them than I am of Al Queda. So i just keep my head down and try not to draw their attention.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The President, his wife and daughters are protected by the secret service. They know where they are at all times, with or without a cell phone.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I say ok
That's your first mistake.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I say ok
I never have really trusted anything that comes out of a mouth in DC, and this administration certainly isn't helping thus far.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
But how much change can one man really make? If he comes through on a quarter of his promises many, many promises, I think I'll be impresseed.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
This is getting redonkulous
@Cap'n Jack, how much can one man do? I dont know, execute 10 times the normal amount of executive orders as any president in history by his 3rd month. Spend 10 trillion dollars by his third month. Pass any bill he wants with the current officials in office in the Senate and House.
This is a Stalinist dictatorship, if you think you weren't safe 4 months ago, hold on to your ass now.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Snoop on the opposition.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
That already exists.
But warrantless access to this info could lead to real time monitoring of millions of people in the near future.
Which is exactly what any sane person does NOT want. If you think real-time monitoring of people is a good thing I have a little book I want you to read, it is called Nineteen Eighty-Four.
The moment president Obama finds out that someone at the NSA is tracking his daughters or his wife through their cell phones, he'll change his mind pretty quick. Similar things have happened here in Portugal and in Italy. Governments approved relaxed rules for phone tapping and the jailing of defendants while waiting trial, but then rushed to limit it when it was actually used on public officials and politicians.
You don't seem that familiar with the way laws work in america. here, they take for bloody ever to get rid of laws that everyone hates (prohibition) and even ignoring that point laws should not be made in a style of throwing everything to see what sticks and then repeal it if it doesn't. Not to mention that it is a major violation of our constitution, you may have heard of it, it is a piece of paper that used to mean something here.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
El Presidente!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I say ok
--
www.chl-tx.com Thanks BHO, for the tremendous boost you have given my business.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I don't mean to suggest that it's not worth debating what the standards ought to be for getting this information - it is - but then perhaps it would be worth a longer Techdirt post explaining why this information ought to be given greater protection than it has in the past.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What the hell
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I'm also familiar with (and actually read :)) the US Constitution, and I totally agree with you. My point was, if Obama or anyone in government right now, is for unfettered surveillance via cell phones, they will likely change their minds when it gets abused - J. Edgar Hoover style - against them. This isn't an excuse to let them approve these laws, but rather something they should be reminded off, so they don't.
Now that I think about it, a J. Edgar Hoover type scandal would be good for the US and the world right now. To stop all these ideas of unfettered surveillance and security above everything.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What the hell
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Big Bro-ther is in the House!
How else can they seize more of what you earn, if they can't electronically track you?
F'r instance, "use tax" on out of state purchases is only viable when there is an electronic audit trail for the tax board to use against the buyer. Try collecting that $.85 on paper, but collect that $85.00 over 100 purchases for the year, add on fines, and you've got a huge revenue source for spreading the wealth around. Isn't it convenient that Ebay now mandates Paypal? No more off-the-books income for the masses.
With GPS tracking, not only will it become easier for the state to assess virtual child support payments (an automatic lien on your person at 18% interest), but to establish state of residence (the better to tax you with) and trump you up on newly invented interstate commerce violations. Oh yes, they're coming. Imagine the cigarette cartons with RFID chips embedded...
Sure, it sounds paranoid. But we've come from a place where smoking was permitted everywhere, to a society where plastic bags are banned, dogs are lo-jacked, indian mascots and coke machines are evicted from school campuses, law enforcement officers lose their jobs ex-post-facto over misdemeanor domestic battery, and MSNBC can act as judge, jury and executioner for thought crimes.
Its only a matter of time before they come for you.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment