Geo-Fencing Case Study

Today, individuals are sacrificing privacy in order to feel safe. These sacrifices have made a significant impact on the current meaning of privacy, but may have greater consequences in the future. According to Debbie Kasper in her journal, “The Evolution (Or Devolution) of Privacy,” privacy is a struggling dilemma in America. Kasper asks, “If it is gone, when did it disappear, and why?”(Kasper 69). Our past generation has experienced the baby boom, and the world today is witnessing a technological boom. Technology is growing at an exponential rate, thus making information easier to access and share than ever before. The rapid diminishing of privacy is leaving Americans desperate for change.

Technology has become more accessible to the point it has become easier for government to watch everyone's move. In this generation technology takes over everyone's daily life, where people wakes up and the first thing is look at is the phone. A phone there are many things on it, like text, pictures and videos. Phones can do many things, but there is a possibility where the government can tap into a phone and look through it. The government can watch everyone’s: text, history, private info, and pictures. Government has no right to looking through people’s personal info because it violates Fourth amendment, Blackmail, and Creates fear.

Among the most precious information in criminal inquiries is the location of suspects, and when it comes to location records captured by smartphones, court rulings have also been inconsistent. Privacy advocates

Telephone is a telecommunications device used to communicate between two or more people in any distance. Primarily telephones were used only for communication purposes but today telephones are as powerful and useful as computers are. With the evolution of phones, many things have changed which includes phone records. In past, phone records involved only phone numbers but today there is so many data and information on phones. These records include phone numbers, bank information, personal pictures and videos, location and text messages. These records are often used by law enforcers to investigate crimes by gathering information from phone records. Since 1970 many things has changed. This paper examines the technological differences between phone records in the 1970 and smartphones, privacy and how courts affect the technology.

Until now, many people argued that searching of historical cell phone records affects people’s privacy, but some other argue that the fourth amendment gives extreme protection for people’s privacy and it puts the country’s safety at risk. In general, it’s obvious that the fourth amendment gives extreme privacy to people since searching for the call history of a person to find just the location and time of call of a person without getting deep into its contents doesn’t touch the privacy of a person but at the same time gives an important information for

Digital data stored on mobile phones have created new challenges for law enforcement due to the vital information regarding possible criminal activity but it has also created new challenges in how the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures when it comes to digital data stored on cell phones seized incident to arrest.

In this growing day and age, as modern technology becomes more advanced than ever thought possible, there are a multitude of ways people are committing federal crimes, under the disguise of protecting their individual privacy. First Amendment states–“Congress shall make NO law”—and holds instead that there be no unreasonable search and seizure. Meaning, the framers of the Constitution

R.v. Colarusso (1994) states that “the citizen’s right to have a reasonable expectation of privacy.” In digital evidence, our cellphone and personal computer are considered as having a very high expectation of privacy, so search warrant or consent to search are usually required when search such devices. However, it is suggested that the degree of privacy is lessened where a personal computer has been brought to a repair shop by R. v. Graham (2010). So a computer technician can make a copy of clients’ data and give it to police officer to inspect without warrant or consent. In some other situation, like devices searched by incident to arrest or under plain view, search warrant is still required for inspection, even if devices are already in police officer’s

With the seemingly exponential propagation of inexpensive digital communications technologies over recent years, the general public is becoming more aware of the issues surrounding information privacy and government surveillance in the digital age. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry with a smart-phone has to be wary of how they use their private information for fear of that information being collected and used in a way contrary to their wishes. "Leaky" smartphone apps that transmit private information across the internet can be unethically used by government agencies. The issue of privacy is a balancing act; the public usually wants increased privacy and the government usually wants increased access.

Several court cases, some dating back to the early 2000s, have been held over the tracking and/or seizure of cell phones by police authority. This has stirred up massive controversy due to the courts inconsistent rulings that seem to vary by state. This can be troublesome in many instances where a similar trial in two different states can have two different rulings, meaning there is no precedent rule or written mandate for such occasion. While cell phone technology in particular is becoming more and more of a utility for not just our personal but our public lives as well, the people are beginning to fight for their privacy through the use of their digital

Since the time the framers of the constitution, technology has improved significantly which has led to an increasing concern in the privacy of an individual. Technology, used by government agencies and commercial enterprises, has led to a change in one’s privacy and freedom. For this reason, the agencies and enterprises have been called into question of infringement of the fourth. Using the lessons learned from history, the framers of the constitutions created the fourth amendment, which protects from unreasonable searches, and the fifth amendment, which prevents a person from incriminating himself or herself, to create a government with just laws, but with the advancement in technology, the fourth amendment needs to expand its policies to fit the changes in modern society.

There are a lot of questions that need to be answered in front of the court about cell phones before they can make legislation of whether or not to allow warrantless search. A question that comes up a lot is how can the lower courts compare searching a cell phone to searching a pack of cigarettes? This is because cell phones store data, and data contains personal information, when a box of tobacco doesn’t. When they do overcome this dilemma the next question will be: how far should the searching extended, text messages, call logs, pictures, GPS history, file sharing programs,

Government surveillance in the past was not a big threat due to the limitations on technology; however, in the current day, it has become an immense power for the government. Taylor, author of a book on Electronic Surveillance supports, "A generation ago, when records were tucked away on paper in manila folders, there was some assurance that such information wouldn 't be spread everywhere. Now, however, our life stories are available at the push of a button" (Taylor 111). With more and more Americans logging into social media cites and using text-messaging devices, the more providers of metadata the government has. In her journal “The Virtuous Spy: Privacy as an Ethical Limit”, Anita L. Allen, an expert on privacy law, writes, “Contemporary technologies of data collection make secret, privacy invading surveillance easy and nearly irresistible. For every technology of confidential personal communication…there are one or more counter-technologies of eavesdropping” (Allen 1). Being in the middle of the Digital Age, we have to be much more careful of the kinds of information we put in our digital devices.

Technology is constantly upgrading everyday and it creates unique challenges for individuals privacy rights while there are regulators looking to preserve both privacy rights and technological innovation. For awhile now society has been struggling on how to balance privacy rights and emerging technologies. For example, early as 1890, Newspapers and Photographs were on the rise and legal scholars called for added privacy protections, including enshrining those rights in criminal law. As people have a right to protect their privacy, it is still a struggle while promoting innovation in this fast increasing technology world we live in today.

Trends in the market include the growing number of people within the 15-29 age range. Also, phones are being used for much more than just calling, other functions like texting and music playing capabilities have dominated much of a user’s data usage. As for market characteristics, the mobile industry has reached almost 50% penetration with about 130 million subscribers, and reaching its maturity. The cost structure has been very confusing for consumers, with hidden fees, overcharges, and lacks to reward users who do not use their plans to the max. And finally, channels include all service provider stores and retail consumer stores, for example, Target, Walmart, and Best Buy.