Cell phone tracking: The revolutionary yet controversial tool of surveillance

The relationship between a cell phone and its user may seem like a monogamous one, but in reality, there is more than what meets the eye. The cellular device doesn’t exactly stay loyal to its legitimate owner, but in fact liaisons with other parties, sharing the personal information and location of its user with those parties. This infidelity on part of cell phones has led to new techniques of surveillance, some of which are quickly replacing the traditional methods. The most attractive surveillance tool for cops For the law enforcement bodies, cell phone tracking is proving to be the ultimate surveillance tool and effectiveness alone is not the reason for this. In their paper published in the Yale Law journal, privacy-focused researchers Kevin Bankston and Ashkan Soltani drew a comparison between the per-hour cost to law agency of tracking a person’s location using different surveillance techniques such as officers on foot, a five-car “surveillance box” operation, planting GPS devices on the suspect’s vehicle, and last but not the least, cell phones, and reached some staggering figures. As per their research and calculations, using cell phone tracking can bring down the cost of surveillance operations from hundreds of dollars an hour to just a few dollars, or even pennies. The researchers estimated the per-hour cost of using a five-car “surveillance box” operation to be $275. However, using a GPS device on the vehicle of the same suspect brings down the cost to only 36 cents an hour. If, however, the suspect is track through their cell phone, then the per-hour cost would vary depending on their cellular carrier. Depending on short-term and long-term tracking, AT&T charges cops $5.21 and $1.19 per hour respectively. On the other hand, T-Mobile charges cops $4.17 per hour and Sprint does it for as little as 4 cents an hour. Having to pay so little for such an effective tool, it’s no wonder that technological solutions are rapidly replacing traditional, more conspicuous surveillance methods. The need for regulation The legality of high tech tracking has been under debate for quite some time now, as it threatens to violate the Fourth Amendment. Despite being there for many years, it wasn’t until 2012 that the warrantless use of GPS devices by the cops was finally declared unlawful by the Supreme Court in its landmark decision in the US vs. Jones case. The court had ruled that the use of high tech tracking devices wasn’t just an improvement on traditional surveillance, but is actually an entirely different type of tracking altogether, one that potentially violates the reasonable privacy expectations of individuals.. Bankston and Soltani intend to use their study to indicate the different nature of cell phone tracking and how its usage needs to be regulated. The researchers have deduced that if a location tracking technique is a certain magnitude less expensive than traditional techniques, then it violates reasonable expectations of privacy and is therefore unconstitutional. Since cell phone tracking is cheaper than even GPS tracking, they argue that new laws need to be introduced to address this modern surveillance technique. The cautious stance of government The US Judicial system has not clarified its stance on warrantless cell phone tracking so far. There have been instances when the matter has been dragged to lower courts and drawn conflicting verdicts, but the government has been careful not to appeal against a decision against it in higher court, lest the higher courts binds its usage in shackles as it had done with GPS devices. The matter of warrantless cell phone tracking is something that the courts definitely need to look into, especially with its use growing more prevalent among law enforcement bodies and security agencies. The cellular carriers also need to ask themselves whether it’s okay to be generous with users’ location data.
http://bobbybluesqare.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default