Uncle Sam to Try and Regulate GPS Tracking Data

It appears that the Republicans and the Democrats are trying to walk across the aisle with a proposed measure on GPS tracking. This act, drafted by Senator Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) and Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), would regulate how businesses and law enforcement agencies access and use GPS (global positioning systems) location data. Currently, this type of information can be captured from smart phones, tablets and other mobile devices.

The act, known as the Geolocation and Privacy Surveillance Act, is an initial effort in the groundwork to determine how geolocation information can be used. According to those who drafted the bill, this area of law needs to be adapted to meet the needs of the times.

The GPS technology sector has many companies providing tracking technology to millions of businesses and individuals. It’s big business. According to Senator Wyden, “federal laws have failed to keep up, resulting in a lack of rules governing the use the data.”

The catalyst for this proposed legislation is patterned from current wiretapping laws where penalties are enforced if geolocation information is gathered without proper authority or purpose. In other words, there had better be a good reason for using this tracking data if you are a law enforcement official. The issue is determining the scope of that reason.

The GPS Act would establish standards and procedures for law enforcement to meet so that the information could be used in court. Obviously, the baseline would be probable cause, a warrant, and service providers would need the consent of the consumers to share the information with anyone.

For providers, who are many, it would apply to both real-time tracking and tracking from historical information. It also covers data from law enforcement officials from mobile devices (smart phones, tablets and such) as well as devices that are on vehicles.

So … what does this mean for an employer using tracking devices on vehicles to monitor and track his employees?

It’s an interesting question. The primary message here is that for users of geolocation data, information is protected.