Domestic Surveillance Drones Could Spur Tougher Privacy Laws

An anonymous reader writes "Have you ever been spied on by a surveillance drone? No? Are you sure? Maybe it looked like a hummingbird. Or an insect. Or maybe it was just really high up. Maybe there's one looking in your window right now, and if so, there's no law that says it shouldn't. In a recent article in the Stanford Law Review, Ryan Calo discusses how domestic surveillance drones would fit into the current legal definitions of privacy (and violations thereof), and how these issues could inform the future of privacy policy. The nutshell? Surveillance robots have the potential to fundamentally degrade privacy to such an extent that they could serve as a catalyst for reform."

Comments

Re:By "reform" you mean legal for Gov' not for us.

[betterunixthanunix]

perhaps I'm just a cynical bastard.

Well, the easiest way to show you are not would be to provide us with some sort of evidence that such laws have been passed before. Let me give you a hand with that:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/us/23cnceavesdropping.html?pagewanted=all

Re:By "reform" you mean legal for Gov' not for us.

[tomhudson]

Only in the United Stazis of America. Such surveillance, even by your neighbor, is illegal in other countries. For example, here in Kanuckistan, a guy was spying on his soon-to-be-ex. He was sitting in his car across the street from his house. The police asked him what he was doing, and he said "That's my house. I'm waiting to catch my wife cheating on me with my brother."

They told him it was illegal, even if it was his own house, since (1) he wasn't on his own property, and (2) he didn't have the consent of the people he was watching. They gave him a choice - move on or be arrested.

Even private detectives are no longer allowed to do surveillance against individuals on their own property any more in PoutineVille.