If this had been in EU then the owner could have requested the information under GDPR, as the tracking data is private information connected to the person.
That's an interesting interpretation of GDPR. The car is not under the control of the owner, and so the location data isn't the owner's data.
Do you think a judge would be influenced by the distinction between tracking a person and tracking the property of a person?
I am also a bit curious of how the contract between the company and the device owner would transfer to the thief. The common way for companies to enable tracking is by having the user agree to it, but the thief clearly did not. Do a thief in EU have a GDPR case against a company if the owner track the stolen device through a service like this one?
If you're not driving the car it's not your personal data, is it? It can't be used to identify you or anything about you, and so your data rights do not apply.
I hear the argument, but I wonder if you think judge would see that distinction as a valid argument in a court. A big part of the legal system is to actually see similar thing as being similar, even if there are technical differences.
Technically you can not track a person online. You can track an IP address, or a cookie, or an ID string in a database, but the server does not have eyes on the person behind the screen. Anyone can be behind the same IP address, people share accounts, browsers and devices. A operator can never be 100% sure if a data point identify you or anything about you.
But I don't think a judge would see that technical distinction. European courts already see mobile device location data as private data. So I ask you. What do you think a judge say about location data on peoples cars. Personal data just like mobile phones, or not?
Comments
That's an interesting interpretation of GDPR. The car is not under the control of the owner, and so the location data isn't the owner's data.
Do you think a judge would be influenced by the distinction between tracking a person and tracking the property of a person?
I am also a bit curious of how the contract between the company and the device owner would transfer to the thief. The common way for companies to enable tracking is by having the user agree to it, but the thief clearly did not. Do a thief in EU have a GDPR case against a company if the owner track the stolen device through a service like this one?
If you're not driving the car it's not your personal data, is it? It can't be used to identify you or anything about you, and so your data rights do not apply.
I hear the argument, but I wonder if you think judge would see that distinction as a valid argument in a court. A big part of the legal system is to actually see similar thing as being similar, even if there are technical differences.
Technically you can not track a person online. You can track an IP address, or a cookie, or an ID string in a database, but the server does not have eyes on the person behind the screen. Anyone can be behind the same IP address, people share accounts, browsers and devices. A operator can never be 100% sure if a data point identify you or anything about you.
But I don't think a judge would see that technical distinction. European courts already see mobile device location data as private data. So I ask you. What do you think a judge say about location data on peoples cars. Personal data just like mobile phones, or not?