An article from Government Technology covers the use of location tracking technologies by law enforcement and the inevitable privacy issues involved.

Before Scott Peterson was charged with the murders of his pregnant wife, police followed his whereabouts via GPS. The information gathered from the tracking device seemed to indicate that the suspect traveled twice to where the victims’ bodies were later found. But a judge will decide whether that information is admissible in court, and whether the technology is reliable.

Before that, in Washington state, a device was placed on the car of a man accused of killing his daughter. The suspect, unknowingly, led the police to the victim’s grave, and was convicted of the murder.

Washington’s Supreme Court ruled that police need a warrant to attach such devices. The case is considered precedent-setting in extending rights to suspects. In previous cases involving conventional means of surveillance, courts have ruled there were no rights of privacy.

The case differentiates between traditional methods and GPS devices because, according to the judge, the use of GPS tracking systems is a particularly intrusive method of surveillance.

As 3G location technology will find its way into mobile phones, the days of the triangulation technology that tracks general location by cell towers may be numbered, and individual users’ privacy will have to be addressed (the author of the article comments that if Starbucks could lure customers using the technology, some people could argue that law enforcement can use it to locate suspects!)

It is hoped that people will be able/allowed to maintain control over their location by, for example, pushing a button on their phone to say, ‘Don’t tell anyone my location now.’”