New Auto Tracking Law
Cindy Cesare, a reporter for KLASTV in Las Vegas, Nevada, did a pretty good job on this story. It’s written as if KLAS’s viewers have more than a third-grade education, which is unusual. I read dozens of such stories every day and most of them could be written better by the average third-grader, frankly. I set out to write Cindy an email note to make a couple additional points about the story, and as usual, I got long winded (long-keyboarded?), so I decided to make it a blog item. I’m sure other states aren’t going to be far behind with laws of this nature. I can’t argue against the practice, but a few points ought to be brought out:
1. The new law is probably a good thing, although how many people will read it or use it to make an informed decision is debatable. One famous case in Connecticut a few years back had a car rental company was using their own GPS tracking device to record renter’s movements and fining them for speeding or other contract violations stirred up considerable controversy even though the rental contract clearly stated that this practice would be used. I’ve never really read a rental car contract, and I never read an owner’s manual unless I can’t find the jack when I have a flat *smile*, but the state is certainly within it’s right to insure citizens are made aware.
2. There are many other ‘black boxes’ on modern vehicles (computer engine controls, air bag deployment computers, anti-lock brake controllers, etc.) that are designed into the vehicle, provide much more detailed information, and unlike OnStar, are not optional equipment, so those worried about being culpable because of driving habits, speeding etc., are being monitored as we speak, with no choice in the matter.
3. The amount of data that GM’s OnStar system actually stores, either on the vehicle for later reference or at the OnStar control center, which _can_ but may or may not monitor the vehicle’s speed and location at any time, is information GM considers proprietary. Law enforcement agencies attempting to recover stolen vehicles with OnStar’s assistance often report errors in excess of a city block or more. Even an owner can not get this information from GM, although the owner is a paying consumer (OnStar has a monthly charge which pays the bill for the cellular telephone air time the system uses, to track either data or voice communication). From a consumer protection viewpoint, is a disclaimer in the owner’s manual anywhere near sufficient disclosure?
4. Relating directly to the point above, OnStar uses the national cellular network to transmit data from the vehicle to OnStar headquarters. This means it’s value in an emergency (especially in a state like Nevada with many wide open spaces) is questionable. It’s my view that the more important disclaimer GM ought to be required to make is the distinct limitations of the system … the magazine ads and TV commercials make consumers think they are really inside OnStar’s “protective cocoon” anywhere they travel, when they most assuredly are _not_.
5. The cellular carriers are required to be able to locate cellular phone locations to various degrees of precision (presently many carriers nation-wide are failing to meet FCC requirements. This location information is ostensibly to be used to tell emergency services organizations where cellular callers in distress are located, but in point of fact can be used to find the location of _anyone_ with a cell phone, often even when a call is not placed. Any time your cell phone is powered it is in communication with the closest cellular provider and you have no control of this, aside from turning the phone off. There are a number of cell phones now on the market that contain a GPS receiver that pinpoints them more accurately, but the basic (less precise) location technology is FCC mandated for _all_ phones.
It’s hardly the purchasers/subscribers to OnStar who are subject to tracking without disclosure … OnStar is literally only the tip of the iceberg.
(Disclaimer: I’m a professional in this field who sells tracking systems for a living. We sell to many businesses who find it important to know the locations and performance of their vehicles and need access to the information they pay for, which only law enforcement (according the GM party line) can get from OnStar.)