Reply #15: Can't read below the fold heh? No it does NOT make it O.K.

[TheMadMonk]

The poster was indicating that car owners are getting this sort of thing forced upon them as an integral part of the bloated ever increasing feature set of new motor vehicles.

A feature which bypasses constitutional protections with an EULA (end user lisence agreement) giving the motor vehicle manufacturer permission to track your movements (past and present) in order to "provide a better end user experience". Among other things to share with: selected partners, allowing them to provide "targeted advertising"; insurers, allowing them more ammunition with which to shoot down claims; and on "legitimate" request, law enforcement. Major problem with the last is that very few people are willing to get in the way of an investigation, for fear their refusal might be reason enough to make them a part of the investigation.

A feature, BTW, which can only be forgone by chosing to have all on board sattelite navigation functionality remotely disabled. Note: that "remotely", means the integrity of the "off switch" is ENTIRELY up to a tech in a cubicle farm somewhere on the Indian sub-continent, and down to the lowest bidder. The alternative, physical intervention with a ball peen hammer (or screwdriver) at the component level is not an option for most users and is likely a deal/warranty breaker anyways.

When every motor vehicle comes with its own built in, remotely triggerable, tracking device, a narrow judicial ruling against the physical installation of a third party device the size of a housebrick becomes entirely irrelevant.

What is needed is a ruling or act of congress/parliament which absolutely forbids any form of continuous tracking of motor vehicles, except in "hot pursuit" or by specific judicial order/probable cause warrant. Increasing ubiquity of license plate recognition systems is quickly making it possible to automatically track the movements of a vehicle without interfering with that vehicle in any way. This alone, if it's not carefully restricted, makes the whole "fitted tracking device" argument null and void.