Driver Privacy Act Introduced In US Senate

greatgreygreengreasy writes "In 2005, then-governor of North Dakota John Hoeven signed into law a bill 'ensuring drivers' ownership of their EDR (Electronic Data Recorder) data.' Now a U.S. senator, Hoeven (R-ND) has teamed up with Amy Klobuchar, D-MN, to introduce similar legislation at the Federal level. 'Under this legislation, EDR data could only be retrieved [for specific reasons].' The EFF has expressed concern in the past over the so-called black boxes and their privacy implications. This legislation, however, would not address the recent revelations by a Ford executive on their access to data, since in those cases, 'The vehicle owner or lessee consents to the data retrieval.' The bill has gained the support of about 20 senators so far."

Comments

More useless legislation

[sixoh1]

Not that I'm skeptical or anything... but I would expect this to end up being just like the "Privacy Policy" notices we all get from banks and other places, or HIPPA - a nice sounding bit of legislation with so many holes in it, the 100-200 page bill will end up doing nothing but giving jobs to "compliance officers" while actually resulting in less opportunity for the "consumer" to sue or block the data access. Think about how HIPPA actually works, since the insurance company needs to know what the doctor treated you for, your "data" gets sent to them (if not the actual paper chart, a summary of what boil on what limb, or what infectious disease test was used). Expect that car companies will hammer this hard in lobbying...

Re:More useless legislation

[ackthpt]

Not that I'm skeptical or anything... but I would expect this to end up being just like the "Privacy Policy" notices we all get from banks and other places, or HIPPA - a nice sounding bit of legislation with so many holes in it, the 100-200 page bill will end up doing nothing but giving jobs to "compliance officers" while actually resulting in less opportunity for the "consumer" to sue or block the data access. Think about how HIPPA actually works, since the insurance company needs to know what the doctor treated you for, your "data" gets sent to them (if not the actual paper chart, a summary of what boil on what limb, or what infectious disease test was used). Expect that car companies will hammer this hard in lobbying...

You think it means something ...

... until you see some guy named Sarek Vulcansden scampering off to the embassy of a South American nation with a Thumbdrive full of evidence the NSA has been tracking your every move and the President denies such claims until they trickle out in the media, including Angela Merkel's predilection for Krispy Kreme whenever she's in the US. About that time you realize laws don't mean much if there be people who think they only apply to other agencies.

Re:More useless legislation

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

As with online surfing, I am far less concerned with the big companies learning I drive to which stores than I am he government having access to it.

"Nobody can gain access without (a law for NSA? A warrant?). Isn't government abuse of spying the reason for all these protections?

Re:More useless legislation

[epyT-R]

You could start with a system that values liberties and rights over twisted reinterpretations, fallacies like 'precedent', and passive aggressive political correctness. Then you could replace those currently in office with those who consider their roles to uphold the constitution as duties rather than careers, ie not people from the ivy league law school track. If the laws are made so complex that they require a law degree to 'interpret,' how can we expect the common man to do so in order to obey? It's a minefield for the majority. Finally, such a system would hold its own enforcers to the same laws and punishments as the rest of us, with no special deals for corporations either.

There are several implied changes that would come from this, most of which would be good.

Re:Pointless

[PPH]

Insurance. You will 'consent' to handing over the data for the cheap policy. No consent and your premiums go up a few K$ per year.

You still have a choice.

Re:And nothing will change.

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

Not the manufacturers per se, but expect fleet operators and car-rental companies to fight this tooth and nail. Meanwhile, the insurance companies will offer cheaper policies if you waive your rights on this, and, of course, opposing lawyers will subpena your black box records in every little accident.

I'm not for driver's "rights"

[TrollstonButterbeans]

Driving is a priviledge, not a right.

You can't drive drunk, high, stupid, menacing, without a seat belt, over the speed limit or run over pedestrians. And you must have insurance.

If someone wants driving privacy, go to a private track.

There are places to worried about government intrusion, but this isn't one of them. About 80% of my driving is either to work or to a store for groceries or what not. I just want it to be safe and efficient.

Re:I'm not for driver's "rights"

[Spy Handler]

Walking is also a privilege, not a right. You will comply when gov't requires you to wear a GPS device around your neck at all times to track your location. It is for a safe and efficient society.

Re:I'm not for driver's "rights"

[davecb]

Actually, use of the public road is a right. Driving a 2-ton clumsy-box at high speed is the thing that's a privilege. Asmittedly, horses and bicycles are annoyingly slow, but no-one can make riding them a privilege (;-))

Useless?

[davecb]

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -- Edmund Burke