Slashdot Mirror
NJ Judge Rules GPS Tracking of Spouse Legal
Endoflow2010 writes "The use of a GPS device to track your whereabouts is not an invasion of privacy in New Jersey, a state appellate court panel ruled today. Based on the battle of a divorcing Gloucester County couple, the decision helps clarify the rules governing a technology increasingly employed by suspicious spouses — many of whom hire private investigators. No state law governs the use of GPS tracking devices, and the ruling, which does not affect police officers, is the first to address the issue, said Jimmie Mesis, past president of the New Jersey Licensed Private Investigators Association. 'We only use it when we are sure we have the appropriate conditions,' [private investigator Lisa Reed] said, noting that investigators make sure GPS devices are installed in cars on public streets and not private areas, and that the spouse must have some legal or financial connection to the car."
Well if you are cheating on your spouse then I am not sure that they are the only one with moral or ethical problems.
Kids? House? Shared commitments?
We're not all 23 and dating, you know.
With the first link, the chain is forged.
Technically, you are only keeping tabs on your own property. This reminds me of a colleague of mine that worked at a phone company, woman called in and was completely furious because they've given the records for HER phone to her husband. Except it wasn't her phone, it was registered in the name of the company and the company was in his name. He requested a detailed bill and the phone company simply complied. It doesn't matter that she was the one using it, that they called it hers because legally it was not - not that she was very willing to listen to that. Same when your spouse is using the car, it's not hers as the ownership is just as joined as ever. Sure a little creepy but it only applies to things you have joint or sole ownership in, that rather limits the uses.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Ownership laws trump privacy laws, but child exploitation trumps just about everything.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
The summary and article weren't specific about what type of tracker it was; it may have stored data locally or broadcast it. If you're storing data on the bug itself for later physical retrieval, then if the person driving the bugged car finds it, they can destroy it and the data, whereas remote monitoring ensures they only destroy the bug. And if it's just broadcasting a cellular signal, you could probably find it.
Now, part of me wonders if a smart bug might only broadcast occasionally, say by sending the last 24 hours of data once a day, to avoid being detected. That could be a bitch to find... (And if it's occurred to me, it's occurred to people smarter than me, so I'll bet that kind of bug exists).
Of course, for either a jammer of detector to matter to the discussion, you'd need to first believe that you were being tracked. TFA mentions this bug was in the glove compartment, so if the person had searched their car, they'd have found and disposed of it, or maybe had some fun screwing around with it first.
Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
When you're at the point of hiring me to follow your spouse, your marriage is already over.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!