DISQUS

"The only scenario I could imagine is if a stalker purchased a LBS-equipped phone, activated the service, signed up for Loopt or some other LBS service, and then threw the phone in the car trunk of the person they wanted to track."

This case has occurred. Yes the phone was hooked up to the battery and also served as a listening device.

But I'm imagining a coercive/abusive relationship. One where we can't just say "its the choice" of the person signing up or adding the service, because not all choices are freely made. Imagine a situation where partner actually DOES force/bully/ coerce another to share their location with them. I believe Loopt incorporates this scenario by allowing people to forge their locations. An industry minimum, I would say.

And one last point. Sometimes this gets noticed, sometimes not, but this situation also raises the importance of having the data subject, not account holder, be able to control their location information.

"First, no one is forcing you to buy the phones equipped with LBS or purchase / download these technologies! "

It could be the case, in a stalking or abuse scenario, that an abuser actually does force someone to use these technologies. Uses it as a form of a "digital leash." Or an employer could also impose these technologies on their staff.

Another point is that given the E-911 mandates, we are already forcing some form of location technology on everyone, though not necessarily the full panoply of services. Increasing location accuracy standards should be matched by increasing privacy standards.