David Sirota: Do Companies Have a First Amendment Right to Track You?

[marmar]

from truthdig:



Do Companies Have a First Amendment Right to Track You?

Posted on Mar 7, 2014
By David Sirota


Do corporations have a legal right to track your car? If you think that is a purely academic question, think again. Working with groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, states are considering laws to prevent private companies from continuing to mass photograph license plates.

This is one of the backlashes to the news about mass surveillance. However, this backlash is now facing legal pushback from the corporations that take the photographs and then sell the data gleaned from the images.

In a lawsuit against the state of Utah, Digital Recognition Network, Inc. and Vigilant Solutions are attempting to appropriate the ACLU’s own pro-free speech arguments for themselves. They argue that a recent Utah law banning them from using automated cameras to collect images, locations and times of license plates is a violation of their own free speech rights. Indeed, in an interview, DRN’s counsel Michael Carvin defends this practice by noting, “Everyone has a First Amendment right to take these photographs and disseminate this information.”

He argues that a license plate is an inherently public piece of information.

“The only purpose of license plate information is to identify a vehicle to members of the public,” he says. “The government has no problem with people taking pictures of license plates in a particular location. But for some irrational reason it has a problem with people taking high speed photographs of those license plates.” ........................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/do_companies_have_a_first_amendment_right_to_track_you_20140307

[NightWatcher]

1. "1st Amendment" & "free speech" are not magic code words

You can't just cite them as any reason to do anything you like.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I don't see anything there that allows a company (Corporations are not people, my friend) to track a persons actions.

[JJChambers]

2. No, but they DO have the ability to do so and right now nothing is prohibiting it.

Corporations do have the legal right to track is, though it hasn't anything to do with the first amendment. And that's a problem. We need privacy laws and / or amendments to state and federal constitutions. I suspect that once the issues of GLBT marriage rights and Marihuana legalization are thoroughly addressed, the next major progressive push will be privacy.

And progressive states will lead the way, once again.

Another example why states' rights are becoming a MAJOR liberal / democrat / progressive platform.

[L0oniX]

5. Consider your own info to have its own DRM.

[JJChambers]

7. Exactly why we need a privacy amendment that protects from government as well as corporate intrusion

[Turbineguy]

3. They seem to have the right

to do whatever you can't stop them from doing.

[L0oniX]

4. Funny ...I got ask why they always fuzz out plates on tv shows like Cops or Cheaters.

For that matter those mugshot sites use the same excuse. As far as that is concerned the local county PD is now blocking public access to it's mugshots and requires ID and a reason to access them. Another question might be to ask about digital rights of those pictures of plates. If fact ...think about that ...DRM. You bought the car ...all info coming from it is yours ...you have DRM on that info? Could also be applied to RFID chips on things you bought.

[L0oniX]

6. Can one setup their own DRM digital rights management?

It would be very interesting to see how that would play out. DRM vs free speech.