AT&T Challenges Government's Warrantless Acquisition Of Cell Site Location Data

from the no-longer-BFFs,-apparently dept

AT&T, of all companies, has just handed in an amicus brief challenging the warrantless acquisition of cell site location data. At the center of this discussion is Quartavious Davis, who was sentenced to 162 years in prison for his involvement in a string of seven robberies, and his cell location records — 67 days-worth which were obtained by investigators without a warrant.

An earlier appeals court ruling found that cell location records are sensitive enough to be afforded Fourth Amendment protection. The government sought a rehearing and so there’s now an en banc rehearing of the case before the full slate of judges from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.

AT&T has normally been very cooperative with law enforcement and national security agencies. This filing may look like a shift in loyalties, but what AT&T is asking for isn’t exactly revolutionary, or even in line with the panel’s previous decision regarding cell site location records.

AT&T said in its filing that it wants the courts to set a clear standard for the type of approval the government needs in order to obtain cellphone location data, and that it isn’t taking a position on whether the standard should be a warrant.

While this lack of solid stance may be only minimally encouraging, AT&T’s challenge of the government’s Third Party Doctrine rationale is a bit more weighty.

AT&T, in a friend-of-the-court brief filed Monday in an appeals-court case, said the high court’s reasoning applies poorly “to how individuals interact with one another and with information using modern digital devices.”

“Nothing in those [prior court] decisions contemplated, much less required, a legal regime that forces individuals to choose between maintaining their privacy and participating in the emerging social, political, and economic world facilitated by the use of today’s mobile devices or other location-based services,” the company said.

This echoes the arguments presented by a few federal judges. While the government clings to the Third Party Doctrine and the assertion that the public “voluntarily” turns over this data, the courts have noted that the dynamic has changed. Cellphones are utilitarian at this point, and not some sort of purely voluntary luxury the public can do without. And what the public very certainly isn’t doing is creating a wealth of information for law enforcement and investigative agencies to access without a warrant.

What is most unusual about this situation is that AT&T has stepped up to oppose the government’s overreach, something it has generally remained largely silent on to this point. This about-face carries with it an air of resentment — the slightly vindictive act of a company that spent years greasing the government’s investigative wheels and got nothing in return but more demands and less respect and trust from the public it hopes to sell products and services to.

Filed Under: , , , ,
Companies: at&t

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “AT&T Challenges Government's Warrantless Acquisition Of Cell Site Location Data”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
15 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

AT&T isn’t fighting this out of the kindness of their hearts. Remember the second feed to the NSA from AT&T’s main feed to the backbone? they even got congress to make it where they couldn’t be sued over it.

The real issue here is AT&T’s bottom line. Everyone was great with helping out the government for millions as long as it was hidden. Now that it’s in the light, people are saying we need something else that grants privacy and you’re not it. That threatens the bottom line and that is the one place they will pay attention to. Hence now they have suddenly gotten religion over some aspect of privacy.

They are looking at long range trends and the picture isn’t good for that aspect. Mainly because all their customers as well as their future customers are pissed enough they will do something about it and that will mean loss of income for AT&T.

Make no mistake, this is not about principals.

tqk (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Make no mistake, this is not about principals.

Not a problem. I don’t expect machines to have ethics or morality. That’s our job. AT&T is a machine for making money (and paying taxes) from legally provided services people are willing to buy from them instead of their competitors.

If the NSA’s antics are interfering with that and leading potential or existing customers to question buying AT&T’s services, this’s exactly what I expect of them.

This’s good news. A corporation sticking to its knitting. Very much better than the NSLs on sticky notes era.

ivanwolf (profile) says:

AT&T said in its filing that it wants the courts to set a clear standard for the type of approval the government needs in order to obtain cellphone location data, and that it isn’t taking a position on whether the standard should be a warrant.

Translation
We just want to know if we can keep accepting post it notes from the FBI and DEA for this kind of records request.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

AT&T demanded and got a get out of being sued for a split feed of their internet to the NSA during the days of George Bush, through an act of congress. So AT&T has no worries in that aspect. That came about right after it was told to media that AT&T had secret rooms with a split straight off their main trunk lines to the NSA.

What AT&T is after now, is another guaranty they won’t be sued as all this stuff with the NSA goes south after the Snowden releases. They made plenty of extra money off the NSA and now they want to make sure they keep it.

Dan J. (profile) says:

Voluntary? In what universe?

While the government clings to the Third Party Doctrine and the assertion that the public “voluntarily” turns over this data, the courts have noted that the dynamic has changed. Cellphones are utilitarian at this point, and not some sort of purely voluntary luxury the public can do without.

I’m a network engineer and I’m on call 24/7. I’m required by my job to be reachable at any time I’m not officially on vacation. My company provides me a cell phone and I have to have it with me at all times. There are many other professions with similar requirements. What part of that sounds “voluntary”?

tqk (profile) says:

Re: Voluntary? In what universe?

What part of that sounds “voluntary”?

Devil’s advocate: you chose to accept, and continue to be employed in, your job. Prima facie: guilty (IANAL, nor do I much fscking care about two millinea old dead language phraseology).

Yeah, I know, how can civilization work when !@#$ like this is what “The Authoritays” focus on? I’m surprised when I see it functioning at all. I’m awaiting the revolution, and learning about youtube-dl ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMPL_ACKmHk).

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...