PogoWasRight.org

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy
Menu

Backyard Privacy in the Age of Drones

Posted on August 28, 2024 by Dissent

Hannah Zhao writes:

Police departments and law enforcement agencies are increasingly collecting personal information using drones, also known as unmanned aerial vehicles. In addition to high-resolution photographic and video cameras, police drones may be equipped with myriad spying payloads, such as live-video transmitters, thermal imaging, heat sensors, mapping technology, automated license plate readers, cell site simulators, cell phone signal interceptors and other technologies. Captured data can later be scrutinized with backend software tools like license plate readers and face recognition technology. There have even been proposals for law enforcement to attach lethal and less-lethal weapons to drones and robots.

Over the past decade or so, police drone use has dramatically expanded. The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Atlas of Surveillance lists more than 1500 law enforcement agencies across the US that have been reported to employ drones. The result is that backyards, which are part of the constitutionally protected curtilage of a home, are frequently being captured, either intentionally or incidentally. In grappling with the legal implications of this phenomenon, we are confronted by a pair of U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 1980s: California v. Ciraolo and Florida v. Riley. There, the Supreme Court ruled that warrantless aerial surveillance conducted by law enforcement in low-flying manned aircrafts did not violate the Fourth Amendment because there was no reasonable expectation of privacy from what was visible from the sky. Although there are fundamental differences between surveillance by manned aircrafts and drones, some courts have extended the analysis to situations involving drones, shutting the door to federal constitution challenges.

Read more at EFF.  This article was originally published by The Legal Aid Society’s Decrypting a Defense Newsletter on August 5, 2024 and was reprinted on EFF with permission.

Category: CourtLawsSurveillanceU.S.

Post navigation

← National Public Data’s response to an opt-out request
Minnesota and Rhode Island Pass Comprehensive Privacy Legislation →

Now more than ever

Search

Contact Me

Email: info@pogowasright.org

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Categories

Recent Posts

  • FTC dismisses privacy concerns in Google breakup
  • ARC sells airline ticket records to ICE and others
  • Clothing Retailer, Todd Snyder, Inc., Settles CPPA Allegations Regarding California Consumer Privacy Act Violations
  • US Customs and Border Protection Plans to Photograph Everyone Exiting the US by Car
  • Google agrees to pay Texas $1.4 billion data privacy settlement
  • The App Store Freedom Act Compromises User Privacy To Punish Big Tech
  • Florida bill requiring encryption backdoors for social media accounts has failed

RSS Recent Posts on DataBreaches.net

  • International cybercrime tackled: Amsterdam police and FBI dismantle proxy service Anyproxy
  • Moldovan Police Arrest Suspect in €4.5M Ransomware Attack on Dutch Research Agency
  • N.W.T.’s medical record system under the microscope after 2 reported cases of snooping
  • Department of Justice says Berkeley Research Group data breach may have exposed information on diocesan sex abuse survivors
  • Masimo Manufacturing Facilities Hit by Cyberattack
©2025 PogoWasRight.org. All rights reserved.
Menu
  • About
  • Privacy