Federal Judge: Only Powered-Off Cell Phones Deserve Privacy Protections

www.aclu.org...

A federal magistrate judge in New York recently ruled that cell phone location data deserves no protection under the Fourth Amendment and that accordingly, the government can engage in real-time location surveillance without a search warrant. In an opinion straight from the Twilight Zone, magistrate judge Gary Brown ruled two weeks ago that “cell phone users who fail to turn off their cell phones do not exhibit an expectation of privacy.”

Do not exhibit an expectation of privacy? hmmmm....So if I have my number unlisted what am I exhibiting? And do we need to state it out loud? Do we need to demand it?

Just by turning your cell on, you hereby give permission to be tracked and have your phone searched without a warrant. Wow.

The case in question involved a physician who the DEA believed had issued thousands of prescriptions for pain killers in exchange for cash. In March of this year, the DEA had obtained a warrant for his arrest, and, not knowing where he was, sought an order from magistrate judge Brown forcing the phone company to provide real-time data identifying the location of the physician’s phone.

And here's what the judge had to say:

Given the ubiquity and celebrity of geolocation technologies, an individual has no legitimate expectation of privacy in the prospective location of a cellular telephone where that individual has failed to protect his privacy by taking the simple expedient of powering it off.

So in essence the privacy fight is over. Many people argued and still do that it's a good thing..."Think of the children"...we can find them if lost. "Think of the criminals..." We can get them BEFORE committing crimes. And don't forget the ever famous "If you aren't guilty of something, what are you hiding?"

Well, it looks like all those wishes are coming true people. You now have your surveillance state exactly as you asked for. Mics on the street corners that can listen in to your private conversations, CCTV watching everything you do...

Good luck with that.

Personally, I don't feel the need to pay a corporation money each Month in order to carry around a tracking device in my pocket that I believe is a violation of my privacy. Threw the damn thing over a bridge 2 years ago and don't miss it all.

I can play Angry Birds on my Lap Top.

Peace

Leave it to the U.S. government to make George Orwell look like Nostradamus.

reply to post by jude11


Wow...just wow...

2nd line

ever wonder why the price of old 2g cell phones are going through the roof no cameras no tracking unlike the modern 3g/4g rubbish which are like having a big arrow pointed at you

I have heard some stupid and insane things come out of a judges mouth. This has to be in the top ten of all time. I am sure that everyone on ATS knows that cell phones can be tracked but to assume that the everyone know this is just pathetic.

Even if people do know, the suggestion that 'they can turn it off' is just .... well, words fail me if I need to keep to the T&Cs.

I am sure s higher court will knock this on the head. It seems that THEY have some judges in their pockets. It is either that or this judge is just a bloody big moronic fool. Give the judge a dunces cap and those silly slippers with the bells on the end of the pointy toes.

P

Originally posted by billdadobbie
ever wonder why the price of old 2g cell phones are going through the roof no cameras no tracking unlike the modern 3g/4g rubbish which are like having a big arrow pointed at you

Unfortunately, the GPS issue is no longer an issue:

www.forbes.com...
Thanks to the growing density of cell towers and the proliferation of devices like picocells and femtocells that transmit cell signals indoors, even GPS-less phones can be tracked with a high degree of precision and can offer data that GPS can’t, like the location of someone inside a building or what floor they’re on.

No GPS? No Problem!

Peace

The ironic thing is it's just an illusion of security. I mean, anyone with any brains at all knows how to circumvent any protocols for security purposes. So what's it do? It makes it look like/feel like everything is secure. It is an ad campaign, propaganda.

It will snare the dumb ones though, that's for sure.

So we have mics and video and location tracking for everyone....



And some dumb gang banger, he posts a photo of him holding a Desert Eagle and it's clear with his record it's not legal ownership. So he gets picked up, GPS tracking delivering him in a ribbon rapped box.

I see a lot of dumb, "would be" criminals getting caught for things.





That is though, if it even lives. This might go to supreme court, and I don't know how it would hold up there.

Originally posted by pheonix358
I have heard some stupid and insane things come out of a judges mouth. This has to be in the top ten of all time. I am sure that everyone on ATS knows that cell phones can be tracked but to assume that the everyone know this is just pathetic.

Even if people do know, the suggestion that 'they can turn it off' is just .... well, words fail me if I need to keep to the T&Cs.

I am sure s higher court will knock this on the head. It seems that THEY have some judges in their pockets. It is either that or this judge is just a bloody big moronic fool. Give the judge a dunces cap and those silly slippers with the bells on the end of the pointy toes.

P

Yup,

This is equal to "If you're not guilty of anything, why are you so worried"? and many more variations of telling the public that they will either put up with it or have an even bigger problem of looking guilty of something.

Peace

Originally posted by boncho
The ironic thing is it's just an illusion of security. I mean, anyone with any brains at all knows how to circumvent any protocols for security purposes. So what's it do? It makes it look like/feel like everything is secure. It is an ad campaign, propaganda.

Funny thing tho. It doesn't make me feel any safer whatsoever. In fact quite the opposite.

When your own Govt. puts eyes and ears in the streets, tracks your every move and has drones flying overhead...seems like a Prison or War to me. The Govt. has declared all people guilty until innocent within the last decade and yet so many are still in welcoming mode of their New Overlords.

Peace

Another thing to consider is the justice system is so backlogged as it already is. This isn't about rounding up everyone, or as many people as they can. It's about targeted prosecutions.

Lets say there are cases are political in nature. Now they can be prosecuted in half the time because investigators can cut down their lead times, and bring twice as much evidence to cases.

Essentially, if you have video/voice/location tracking on anyone, as soon as a political opponent pops up they can be cut down in a matter of days/weeks. Where as in the past it might be months/years/never.

I think, even if they had absolutely every tool they wanted, they would still not be prosecuting many more people than they do now. There is a break point, where only so many people can go behind bars. You still need people to work, be part of society.

Lets face it, there are so many ambiguous laws/statutes on the books (upward of 10-40,000 last time I checked) that anyone, and I do mean anyone, could be prosecuted as a criminal in some way/shape/form. LIke the IRS scandal just now, the head goes "Oops" and "Sorry" when caught red-handed for targeted use of the IRS system against unfriendly political opponents. Uh no, that's criminal. You put people in jail for cheating your system, not adhering to the rules. Why aren't you in jail now then?

In any case, the point is, all these little toys and trinkets, it's for political purposes. Hell, you could even see prosecutions going down, simply because they wont have to do dragnets to get the 1-10 people they are after in some cases...

Originally posted by jude11

Originally posted by boncho
The ironic thing is it's just an illusion of security. I mean, anyone with any brains at all knows how to circumvent any protocols for security purposes. So what's it do? It makes it look like/feel like everything is secure. It is an ad campaign, propaganda.

Funny thing tho. It doesn't make me feel any safer whatsoever. In fact quite the opposite.

When your own Govt. puts eyes and ears in the streets, tracks your every move and has drones flying overhead...seems like a Prison or War to me. The Govt. has declared all people guilty until innocent within the last decade and yet so many are still in welcoming mode of their New Overlords.

Peace

Obviously not, it's downright creepy. But look at Facebook et al. They have trained the newer generations to think it's normal, hell-that it's trendy to create a timeline of your life. A profiling tool used by law enforcement since their inception.

The thing is though, is that they had most of this stuff already for ages, the actual difference. You might see different people getting busted for things. Maybe a slight increase, who knows.

What is certain, is the people they want getting busted, will be.

By they, I mean a number of people. Essentially anyone with control over the system that has enemies.

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by jude11

Originally posted by boncho
The ironic thing is it's just an illusion of security. I mean, anyone with any brains at all knows how to circumvent any protocols for security purposes. So what's it do? It makes it look like/feel like everything is secure. It is an ad campaign, propaganda.

Funny thing tho. It doesn't make me feel any safer whatsoever. In fact quite the opposite.

When your own Govt. puts eyes and ears in the streets, tracks your every move and has drones flying overhead...seems like a Prison or War to me. The Govt. has declared all people guilty until innocent within the last decade and yet so many are still in welcoming mode of their New Overlords.

Peace

Obviously not, it's downright creepy. But look at Facebook et al. They have trained the newer generations to think it's normal, hell-that it's trendy to create a timeline of your life. A profiling tool used by law enforcement since their inception.

People are just falling in line aren't they?

Even this thread and news of even more surveillance/invasion of privacy just doesn't raise an eyebrow as much as it would have just a few years back.

I guess the big foot news and Mars rocks that look like Mars rocks is keeping everyone occupied.

Sad state of affairs my friend.

Peace

People should demand from phone manufacturers that they want a product that you can disable tracking features if you want to. I think any manufacturer doing so could gain a large market share. It is money that drives corporate interest and if they think they can make more money by doing it, then they will.

This won't survive its first appeal.

It is like saying, you would unplug your home phone if you didn't want them to listen in on you.

Or you would lock your doors and windows if you didn't want the cops sneaking into your home to make sure there is nothing bad there at any time.

I think I am just going to become disgustingly rich, for creating a smart phone that cannot be tracked, the mics and cameras can't be remote accessed, and just basically ensures 100 percent security from every outside source.

Save only one loop hole, a secure chip that can only be activated by the owner with a special password in case the phone is lost or stolen.

With uncrackable encryption, so it can't be broken into.

While a lot of mobile phone these days have something that looks like an off button, the unit still uses some level of power. If you really want to preserve your privacy then you do need to take the battery out, also removing the SIM card while you are at it is a good idea.

It's really convenient that federal judges are appointed and not elected, that way if you want someone to tow an agenda and party line and not uphold the constitution as they are supposed to as their supreme duty, you get to appoint those happy to rule and tow that agenda in the office instead.

Hey I know yo appointed me to a sweet job here boss, but what you're proposing isn't really isn't constitutional, which none of them have said ever...

So basically, reading between the lines of double talk... The only way you're going to have privacy, is to not have a cell phone... way to uphold the office buddy, being secure in ones effects and papers has nothing to do with privacy protections... maybe giving judges an updated plain English version of the constitution, would help them understand how to interpret it better...

While on the topic middling and twisting words by interpretation, instead of applying what it plainly says is a bunch of #^^&^% nonsense. Much in the same way people want to read into the what authors may have been meaning or symbolizing instead of what is actually being said...

Does anyone think Stephen King in one of his voluminousness works is mulling over what a paper boat in the gutter means? Or is it just what kids of the era would have played with and it happens to help that IT lives in the gutter? The constitution needs to be read not interpreted. Effects: anything you have on your person PERIOD papers anything you have written or expressed by your own hand... are meant to be secure. No interpretation needed unless you want to start twisting ink out of the constitution to fit what you want it to say... that's when it becomes a literary device left to interpretation.

If you understand the language and can comprehend what these words mean when placed together; then what needs interpretation... other than that judges lack of comprehension? But alas, they are appointed so no tossing anyone out that cannot comprehend their native language, and if it's not in their native language oh man what a patsy appointed they could be... hey esl guy interpret some English for me, not saying it can't be done, but it makes one hell of an excuse why their interpretation could be off later... or ok makes sense it's cool nice try at the game out there hit the showers... oh btw wink wink thanks for sweeping that leg for us.

reply to post by jude11


Privacy fight is *not* over...not by a long shot. Just because some judge makes a wild decision does not make it law or irreversible. If this came from the Supreme Court...that'd be a different story. Of course, it takes these idiot decision to GET it to the Supreme Court to begin with....

reply to post by jude11


I just saw an article about this on RT. Mind-blowing, isn't it?

Brown, certainly to the delight of police, issued a 30-page brief outlining his opinion that, by carrying a cell phone, someone is essentially waiving their Fourth Amendment right to due process.

“Given the ubiquity and celebrity of geolocation technologies, an individual has no legitimate expectation of privacy in the prospective of a cellular telephone where that individual has failed to protect his privacy by taking the simple expedient of powering it off,” Brown wrote.
rt.com...

They just made me put an app on my company I-phone.... In the T&C's it stated that I had no right to privacy.. My work phone is no longer allowed in my home or on my person when I am not on company time.

They say "But what if we need to get a hold of you?"

They should have thought of that before having me sign away my right to privacy while in possession of a company phone.

Point is, these things are easily defeated.... Rid oneself of the eavesdropping spy-tech, embrace your isolation, and deal with whatever problem arises when it is presented to you in person.

Or just do without the damn things entirely.. Probably the best option.

Hurt the fake economy, just throw the damn things out the window.. Hurt the fake environment while you're at it.

reply to post by jude11


I find it disturbing that the phone company will find your phones location for an alphabet agency but if the phone is stolen they won't press a flipping button to do the same.

back to secret messages and encryption codes.