But Facebook, Google, Microsoft, et al are still free to sell phone location data acquired through apps (or Android itself in the case of Google), right? I wonder if there is any hope of laws to limit the ability of companies to sell this data...
Carrier sales of phone-location data is illegal, FCC plans punishment
21–30 of 166 posts
Re: Carrier sales of phone-location data is illegal, FCC plans punishment
#22But Facebook, Google, Microsoft, et al are still free to sell phone location data acquired through apps (or Android itself in the case of Google), right? I wonder if there is any hope of laws to limit the ability of companies to sell this data...
The first case is a far far bigger privacy concern to me, and seems to be what mobile networks were doing. Facebook, Google, and Microsoft are doing the latter.
Re: Carrier sales of phone-location data is illegal, FCC plans punishment
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Supreme Court ruled in 2018 that obtaining phone location data requires a warrant. [1] So no, neither one is okay. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpenter_v._United_States
So this Supreme Court ruling has eliminated all use of Stingray-like equipment by all law enforcement agencies unless they have a warrant? Wow! Looks like Harris will be going of business soon, and no more DRT boxes flying over cities?
Re: Carrier sales of phone-location data is illegal, FCC plans punishment
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Supreme Court ruled in 2018 that obtaining phone location data requires a warrant. [1] So no, neither one is okay. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpenter_v._United_States
So this Supreme Court ruling has eliminated all use of Stingray-like equipment by all law enforcement agencies unless they have a warrant? Wow! Looks like Harris will be going of business soon, and no more DRT boxes flying over cities?
Re: Carrier sales of phone-location data is illegal, FCC plans punishment
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Supreme Court ruled in 2018 that obtaining phone location data requires a warrant. [1] So no, neither one is okay. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpenter_v._United_States
So this Supreme Court ruling has eliminated all use of Stingray-like equipment by all law enforcement agencies unless they have a warrant? Wow! Looks like Harris will be going of business soon, and no more DRT boxes flying over cities?
Re: Carrier sales of phone-location data is illegal, FCC plans punishment
#26But Facebook, Google, Microsoft, et al are still free to sell phone location data acquired through apps (or Android itself in the case of Google), right? I wonder if there is any hope of laws to limit the ability of companies to sell this data...
Disclaimer: I work at Google.
Re: Carrier sales of phone-location data is illegal, FCC plans punishment
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Supreme Court ruled in 2018 that obtaining phone location data requires a warrant. [1] So no, neither one is okay. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpenter_v._United_States
So this Supreme Court ruling has eliminated all use of Stingray-like equipment by all law enforcement agencies unless they have a warrant? Wow! Looks like Harris will be going of business soon, and no more DRT boxes flying over cities?
Re: Carrier sales of phone-location data is illegal, FCC plans punishment
#28Re: Carrier sales of phone-location data is illegal, FCC plans punishment
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
So this Supreme Court ruling has eliminated all use of Stingray-like equipment by all law enforcement agencies unless they have a warrant? Wow! Looks like Harris will be going of business soon, and no more DRT boxes flying over cities?
How did you get from “mobile company providing location data” to “law enforcement use of stingrays to obtain location data”?
Re: Carrier sales of phone-location data is illegal, FCC plans punishment
#30So it's okay for the carriers to provide the phone-location (and other metadata) to government entities without a warrant, but it's not okay to sell it commercially? I'd love to see a legal analysis of that argument.
I don't see where the article addresses that point. While it has some resemblance, seems like a different issue covered by different parts of law.