So you think you’re alone in your car, the last bastion of privacy?
Think again if you have a cellphone, navigation system or wireless information or emergency-assistance service. Those electronic devices could let someone–or possibly several people–know where your car is, where it’s been and where it’s going.
Most of us are happy enough with the benefits of such devices or services that we’ll accept the service provider tracking its whereabouts. Unless safeguards are observed, though, a third-party marketer or government agency could also get access to those facts. It’s all made possible by telematics, the use of in-vehicle communications devices that collect and use personal information, said Daniel R. Sovocool, an attorney at Thelen Reid & Priest LLP who specializes in privacy issues. This can include location information, speed and direction of a vehicle, operator incident records, in-vehicle conversations and e-commerce data.
“Location [capability] is what makes telematics privacy unique,” Sovocool said, creating “unprecedented `data probe’ issues.”
For computers in homes or offices, companies use such techniques as “cookies,” or tiny files sent into your computer, to keep track of customers or visitors.
With telematics systems in vehicles, Sovocool said, “it’s like `cookies’ on steroids.” In addition to having access to other personal data, a company can determine where your vehicle is at all times. Any vehicle that contains a navigation system, for example, is trackable. The satellite-based Global Positioning System, with its ability to pinpoint vehicle locations, is what makes systems work.
“We know exactly where you are as a consumer” with GPS, said Karenann Terrell, director of e-vehicles for General Motors. That’s also true of vehicles with a simple cellular phone.
That can come in handy in an accident. GM’s OnStar emergency system can notify the central office if your car’s air bags deploy–and then summon local authorities to the vehicle. The central office also can unlock your car if you leave your keys in it. And any technology that has to “know” where your vehicle is to work could provide such data to another party.
And though providers of location-based services, including automakers, have not been providing such information to third parties, it does not mean it can’t happen. Unless users demonstrate their unwillingness to make this data available to other companies or the legal system steps in to define exactly how the privacy issue should be handled, location-based information is vulnerable.
Concerns about privacy will grow as the Internet comes to cars, starting with the 2001 model year. This year, 32 General Motors models can be equipped with GM’s OnStar system, which can incorporate a Virtual Advisor for e-mail and Internet access. Mercedes-Benz and Lincoln are offering an information/e-mail access system, giving users access to news, stock reports, sports scores and the like–and serving as a portal into drivers’ privacy.
Though an in-car information system could tell you whether a Wal-Mart or Target or gas station with your preferred brand is nearby, it also could mean that someone could assess your activities at every stop. Even if you don’t tell the system your favorite chain restaurant, for example, a marketer may be able to determine it by studying where you’ve eaten in the last month–and then, start sending you targeted ads.
Privacy is “one of the thorniest issues,” said Jonathan Yarmis, president of the Internet Content Group for eMarketWorld, an industry trade group. It’s “kind of the dirty underbelly of the Internet.”
“I’m sure the world of privacy issues is yet to be scratched,” said Barbara Churchill of IBM, referring to privacy when using in-vehicle devices that know where you are. If you request a particular service, she explained, you’re acknowledging it may be necessary to know where you are.
The growth of pervasive computing, or non-PC Internet devices, Churchill said, will create portable personas, all open to privacy concerns.
Attorney Sovocool also suggested the prospect of “tough multi-user issues,” when more than one person drives a particular vehicle that could be tracked. If one of those trackable drivers commits a vehicle-related offense, authorities are likely to contact the owner of that vehicle, who might know nothing about the infraction.
At a minimum, users of any location-based system should know exactly what they are getting and what they are giving up. Disclosure, said Sovocool, must be accurate, visible, consistent and easy to understand. The user must be able to chose what information–if any–to provide.
Privacy is “all about permission-based marketing,” said Levine.
Some Web sites offer contests in which the customer must be willing to give up information to enter. The amount and depth of information a respondent will provide depends upon his or her comfort level, Levine said. “There’s certain information that I would consider `hands-off,'” such as Social Security numbers.
“There’s an amazing amount of information people will tell you,” said Clarke Caywood, chair of integrated marketing at Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism. “There’s a segment of the audience that will tell you everything and more.” Still, consumers “have that choice. They have the ability to give this information if they trust you.”
PRIVACY LAWS DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE
Telematics privacy is a patchwork of federal and state laws in a state of flux, said Daniel R. Sovocool, an attorney at Thelen Reid & Priest LLP in San Francisco.
Basically, the technology is too new to have been tested in court, though certain Fourth Amendment cases give a little definition. These federal cases have dealt mainly with tangential issues, such as the use of public phone booths, cellphones and beepers.
There is a “huge body of law dealing with search and seizure issues,” Sovocool said, asking “to what extent can the government use technology for surveillance”? Their findings, however, don’t necessarily extend to in-vehicle locating devices.
In U.S. vs. Katz, for instance, governmental agents placed a “bug” atop the public phone booth. In U.S. vs. Knotts, a beeper was inserted into a drum of chloroform, which was then hauled by a person under investigation who could be tracked electronically. While on a public roadway, the court indicated, “you’re in plain view of others,” and therefore lack a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Sovocool suggested one of the significant issues that might arise as courts get to GPS-related devices. He posed the question of what might happen if a service such as GM’s OnStar is asked by a governmental agency to “track” one of its subscribers, turning over information on that person’s locations.
Despite the Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999, Sovocool said, “Congress does not seem to be too troubled” about marketers, officials or others knowing where you are. States are traditionally active in these areas but tend to treat this as a consumer issue.
Ten states, including Illinois, have “express” privacy guarantees spelled out in their state constitutions, guaranteeing individuals a general right to privacy. Many more have “implied” privacy protections, where courts have made judgments related to the issue. In addition, a few states have specific laws against nonconsensual monitoring of vehicles, California being the most strict. California constitutionally guarantees a right to privacy and states that a vehicle monitoring system can infringe on that right.
Canada has “more of a European approach than we do” to privacy, Sovocool said. Its Personal Information Protection & Electronic Documents Act, being phased-in, offers broad privacy protection. The European position is that “we’re going to regulate it and have a set of privacy principles.” The U.S. leans instead toward self-regulation.
ONSTAR SERVICES
Though GPS-based communications systems raise privacy questions because they can monitor a car’s whereabouts at all times, they have great utility.
General Motors’ OnStar service, for example, provides information and assistance to drivers by connecting them with an adviser, who provides emergency and convenience services including:
– Contacting police or emergency personnel when requested. Emergency personnel are also contacted automatically if the air bags are deployed.
– Contacting your insurance agent after an accident.
– Tracking your car and contacting police if it is stolen.
– Unlocking car doors if your keys are inside. Advisers can also lock the doors.
– Providing the advisers to have medical information, including allergies, your blood type and the name of your physician to be faxed to the hospital in an emergency.
A premium service plan offers additional services, including:
– Finding the nearest hotel, gas station or ATM location.
– Calling a taxicab or relative if your auto breaks down.
– Acting as a concierge by having advisers order tickets, flowers or the like.
Source: www.onstar.com
