Cell Phone tracking

Cell Phone tracking

Introduction

Identifying the location of a cell phone device is arguably an important aspect. By the use of GPS-enabled cell phones, companies can monitor their employees if they are at the right place at the right time, parents can identify the safety of their children, movement of vehicles of either suspects or businesses can be tracked, among many other vital scenarios. Nonetheless, several ethical concerns are being raised regarding cell phone tracking. Controversial arguments have ensued whether the act is ethical or unethical with other scholars, arguing it violates the tracked person’s freedom. For instance, in the U.S. Supreme Court judges in a case ruled that attaching a GPS (Geographical Position System) device to a suspect’s vehicle without a warrant violates the suspect’s rights. This paper gives explores the use of GPS, its negatives and positives, and the ethics surrounding the issue. The paper argues against the use of the devices as the privacy of individuals outweighs all the positives of the GPS device. The article mainly focuses on the works of Adam Moore, who contends that an individual’s privacy is paramount even as companies want to control their employees and minimize fraud.

Literature Review

Moore has identified some of the positives and negatives that computers and modern technology have in the workplace. Some of the advantages identified by Moore include increased productivity, better communication amongst employees, and safe working conditions. The negative side is the loss of privacy and autonomy of the employees. Though companies want to monitor their employees and reward effort, productivity, success, and intelligence and eliminate fraud and failure, this goes at the expense of the employee’s privacy. Moore contends that individuals have rights to privacy that shield them from the prying eyes and ears of governments, corporations, and other people. He says that the surveillance done to employees by many companies and corporations violates this rule and is unjustified (Moore, 2000).

GPS, according to Michael et al. (2006), can calculate a GPS receiver’s position, time, and velocity. Notwithstanding, several ethical issues arise from the use of GPS-enabled cell phone tracking system. Observational study research by McNamee (2005), analyzed some of the ethical concerns arising from the real-time tracking of individuals using GPS-based location services. According to the article, ethically, a person’s location should not be known unless the person is engaging in illegal activity (p. 51). Rationally, this means that someone being tracked should be informed, and the consequences of his tracking made clear to him. Notably, in parent-child monitoring, parents should not use the technology to monitor their children’s movement but only for their safety. Therefore, in terms of privacy, according to McNamee, safeguards should be in place to protect the tracked persons by informing them of the reasons and consequences of tracking.

McNamee raises ethical concerns on the accuracy of the GPS. The system, like other technological systems, has inaccuracies not only caused by conditions such as tall buildings, tree canopies, and cloud cover but also by information processing. If not enough, ethical concerns arise on both the ownership and the accessibility of the tracked information. Indeed the U.S. government owns the system, but ethical concerns occur after the data is collected to whomever it is handed to.

GPS is used in various applications in measuring exposures and activities. Lately, according to Michael et al., its adoption has profoundly expanded in both the private and public sectors. Michael notes that the system is advancing in complexity and now makes it possible to record travel routes. Besides, it has not only been used in business but also for leisure activities. Scholars have seen the potentials in studying human behavior using the tracking system. In studying human behavior, Michael et al. conducted research, tracking the travel patterns of adolescents, using a GPS-enabled cell phone. In their subsequent article, they published that GPS-enabled cell phones can reliably and accurately track adolescent’s locations and record their diary behaviors.

GPS data is subject to alteration, however. GPS data is subject to intentional or unintentional vulnerabilities. Despite recording travel routes, GPS data can be maliciously edited, and the signals spoofed (Iqbal & Lim, 2008). The GPS data, in recent years, has gained widespread use in the legal system in some cases as evidence collected. With the preceding, its use in the legal procedures is reported to have started receiving attention because of the possibility of presenting forged data in court cases.

Moreover, other researches have recorded the possibility of inaccuracy in GPS cell phone tracking. A study by Merry and Bettinger (2019) assessed the accuracy of the iPhone 6, a GPS-enabled phone, under various conditions including urban forest conditions in two seasons of the year. The research recorded a possibility of horizontal GPS tracking position errors, such as from 7 to 13 meters. Notwithstanding, it is also important to note that the traffic industry is not left out in the widespread use of GPS devices. According to Tao (2012), GPS cell phones are replacing the initially existing sensor-based tracking systems. However, its deployment is coming with concerns not only to the traffic industry but also to the ethical field.

Discussion

It is essential to analyze into details the emerging ethical concerns. Because of the increasing adoption of GPS-enabled cell phone tracking by both the private and public enterprises (Michael et al., 2006), the paper, in analyzing the concerns, utilizes a preliminary ethical framework in analyzing the GPS-enabled cell phone tracking. The analysis applies the usability-context concept with the fact that ethics is considered to be a system of moral principles. From the majority of scholars, privacy, accuracy, and accessibility concerns are the most significant emerging issues requiring much focus.

Cell phone tracking, whether purposeful or non-purposeful, is arguably a double-edged sword. Incidentally, despite widespread use, there is no defined acceptable use of GPS. From several articles, it is evident privacy is the most critical concern in GPS use. It is a rightful claim that tracking individuals violate their rights. An individual’s position should not be known unless he/she engages in a wrongful act (Michael et al., 2006; McNamee, 2005). Despite some parents arguing that tracking their children is only for safety purposes, a parent should only know a child’s location if the child is doing the wrong thing.

Similarly, employers should only track their employers if they are not doing the right thing at the right time. The same extends to suspected criminals. A warrant should always be given to criminals to ensure justice and to avoid violation of their rights. It is to this effect that the U.S. Supreme Court in Jones’ case ruled that attaching a GPS device to a suspect’s vehicle without a warrant violates the suspect’s rights (McAllister, 2013).

From the literature analysis, it is evident the GPS is seen to be error-prone. The system depending on various conditions, can give errors in readings (Michael et al., 2006). Under conditions such as in a cloud cover, tall building, dense forest, and moist weather, inaccuracies can be experienced in the recordings. For instance, research by Merry and Bettinger (2019) assessed the accuracy of the iPhone 6 and reported a possible horizontal positional error as from 7 to 13 meters. Moreover, not only is inaccuracy seen in different condition but also during the GPS data processing. Reinstated, the U.S. government owns the system but is not under any obligation to ensure safety. Surprisingly, no party is always held accountable in case of any errors in the system. It is for the system’s inaccuracy that several rental car companies in California wrongly fined customers $3000 for allegedly getting out of the state. Unquestionably, reporting a piece of inaccurate information about an individual is unethical.

Software stores for tracking data are editable, making GPS prone to intentional and unintentional vulnerabilities. Iqbal and Lim (2008) proved in their research that data could be maliciously edited and the signals spoofed. In that sense, cell phone tracking data can always be edited, and data points changed to create false data. Following the recent widespread gain in the use of the GPS in the legal proceedings, individuals can use the false evidence they have forged against an innocent person or to falsely protect themselves.

Property concerns are experienced in cell phone tracking. Controversies exist on who owns tracking information. Reinstated, the U.S. owns the system but not the data collected. Using one’s data without letting them know violates their rights. Although the GPS is free to use, nobody is obligated to hand over one’s details either purposefully or not to anybody without their consent.

The GPS policy objectively aims at providing worldwide positioning and timing services (Michael et al., 2006). Notwithstanding, it can be shut down in some unusual scenarios like during terror attacks. Shutting down GPS can aid in thwarting a terrorist attack, but at the same time, inconvenience several individuals and businesses that were already using the system. Furthermore, the system has been used to track sex offenders and parolees in an attempt to monitor their actions. The system has helped in controlled rehabilitation and significantly deterred crimes. Research by Wiehe et al. (2008) applied a similar tracking system on adolescents and realized the system could accurately and reliably track an individual’s location and record diary information. Conversely, the adolescents noted that tracking never influenced their activities.

Ethical principles on cell phone tracking

Utilitarianism

Most of the ethics about phone tracking revolves around privacy. Utilitarianism asserts that an act is moral if it produces the highest amount of pleasure to the majority of people. GPS tracking infringes the fundamental freedom of human beings. You live in fear because you don’t know what the person watching you is plotting to do. People who use GPS have a moment of pleasure as they can see what other people are doing. For parents watching their teenage, their relationship may be torn apart. Therefore, using the utilitarian principle, cell phone tracking is unethical because it does not produce the greatest balance of good over evil.

Kantian theory

Since people use GPS with the motive of knowing what someone is up to, it is not always a bad thing to watch someone; it depends on who the other party is. For example, GPS could help save people from being attacked, kidnapped, or control criminal activities. Installing GPS on criminals can minimize the harm they cause to people.

Autonomy and respect for persons

The use of GPS infringes on the privacy of individuals. The systems give information about the whereabouts of a person without their consent. Using these devices goes against the autonomy of people. From the article by Moore, there are some kinds of evaluative monitoring that violate the privacy rights of employees. Privacy is central in Moore’s article. He describes privacy in many ways but majors with privacy in the workplace (Moore, 2000).

Conclusion

Cell phone tracking with the aid of a GPS is arguably essential. However, there are little benefits than disadvantages accounted for. Potentially it can save a child’s life but still doing that at the child’s privacy expense. It is ethically wrong to track a person’s location without informing them and revealing to them the consequences of the tracking. Besides, it is unethical to follow a person even in their consent as the monitoring may impose restrictions on them. Incidentally, several pieces of research have reported an inaccuracy in the tracking systems. Inaccurate reporting on individuals resultantly leads to unjust and unethical actions taken against them. For example, falsely protecting oneself or accusing an innocent person of a crime he/she didn’t do is unquestionably wrong. Moore’s article argues against the infringement of the rights of individuals.

The use of GPS helps track criminals and parolees, track children, tracking teens, tracking spouses, and tracking employees. The tool can be a valuable asset because it can be used to maximize the general welfare of society. It, however, infringes the right to privacy of individuals. As Moore puts it, individuals have the right to privacy, and electronic eyes and ears are not welcome. The working environment should be constructed to promote productive activity while maintaining the privacy that we all cherish. People use it for their own selfish means. In my opinion, GPS devices should only be used for emergency cases only; otherwise, they should not be used.

References

Iqbal, M. U., & Lim, S. (2008). Legal and ethical implications of GPS vulnerabilities. J. Int’l Com. L. & Tech., 3, 178. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.367.5673&rep=rep1&type=pdf

McAllister, M. (2013). GPS and cell phone tracking: A Constitutional and empirical analysis. U. Cin. L. Rev., 82, 207.

McNamee, A. (2005). Ethical issues arising from the real-time tracking and monitoring of people using GPS-based location services. http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=thesesinfo

Merry, K., & Bettinger, P. (2019). Smartphone GPS accuracy study in an urban environment. PloS one, 14(7). https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?type=printable&id=10.1371/journal.pone.021  9890

Michael, K., McNamee, A., & Michael, M. G. (2006, June). The emerging ethics of humancentric GPS tracking and monitoring. In 2006 International Conference on Mobile Business (pp. 34-34). IEEE. http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=10215&context=infopapers

Moore, A. D. (2000). Employee monitoring and computer technology: Evaluative surveillance v. privacy. Business Ethics Quarterly, 10(3), 697-709.

Tao, S. (2012). Mobile phone-based vehicle positioning and tracking and its application in urban traffic state estimation (Doctoral dissertation, KTH Royal Institute of Technology). http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:459739/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Wiehe, S. E., Carroll, A. E., Liu, G. C., Haberkorn, K. L., Hoch, S. C., Wilson, J. S., & Fortenberry, J. (2008). Using GPS-enabled cell phones to track the travel patterns of adolescents. International journal of health geographics, 7(1), 22. https://ij-healthgeographics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1476-072X-7-22