Home | About | RSS Feed | Contact and Publicity Guidelines | Comment Policy the Law, the Universe, and Everything 

advertise-here4


Slip Opinions


Groundhog Day. (fp)

Banned in Tucson. (kw)

The Best and Worst of 2011 in Race and Law (kw)

Tortured to death for trespassing. (fp)

Drones of contention. (fp)

DOJ still coddling banks. (fp)

Creative destruction? Thank banks. (fp)

Blog about a new book, on how to talk to little girls--stressing smarts not cutes.   LAC

Macey on the heroic Rakoff. (fp)

Captured NY Fed. (fp)


solicitors

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments


    • Car accident claim lawyers on Symposium Next Week on "A Legal Theory for Autonomous Artificial Agents"

    • Andrew MacKie-Mason on Can't the Supreme Court Just Say No to Cameras?

    • Joe on Employment Division v. Smith is Wrong

    • Shag from Brookline on Employment Division v. Smith is Wrong

    • Joe on Employment Division v. Smith is Wrong

    • Joe on Super En Banc in the Ninth Circuit

    • Shag from Brookline on Employment Division v. Smith is Wrong

    • G. Calamita on Symposium Next Week on "A Legal Theory for Autonomous Artificial Agents"

    • Joe on Super En Banc in the Ninth Circuit

    • Howard Wasserman on Can't the Supreme Court Just Say No to Cameras?

    • Gerard Magliocca on Super En Banc in the Ninth Circuit

    • Mike on Super En Banc in the Ninth Circuit

    • Ben on Lifecycles and the Firm

    • Samir Chopra on Symposium Next Week on "A Legal Theory for Autonomous Artificial Agents"

    • Chris Berry on Who Gets to Keep Trover?
  •  

    Site Meter

    About the Blog

    Concurring Opinions is a multiple authored, general interest legal blog.

    (Image: Wikicommons)

The New RFID Chip

posted by Daniel Solove

RFID2.jpgHitachi has developed a new RFID chip, one that is much smaller than existing chips. This new chip is not that much bigger than the size of a grain of sand.

RFID stands for “radio frequency identification.” RFID chips are tiny computer chips embedded into products and animals (and sometimes people) to identify and track them. The chips send a signal that can be read by a decoder.

RFID chips have increasingly become cheaper and smaller, but this new development is rather significant. These new chips are small enough to secretly implant into nearly anything. The potential future uses of the technology are quite vast, and they obviously raise many privacy issues. One of the primary dangers is that one day RFID tags will be used to track people’s movements like a GPS homing device.

When it comes to businesses or people who might use RFID to track others, there isn’t much that current law has to say about what they can or cannot do. When it comes to law enforcement officials, the Supreme Court has held that the Fourth Amendment does not apply when an electronic device tracks a person’s movement in public. In United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983), a beeper was attached to an item placed in a person’s car, and the police tracked the car’s movements. The Supreme Court held that it was not a Fourth Amendment violation. However, the Court has held that such tracking within the home is covered by the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Karo, 468 U.S. 705 (1984). Thus, in many places outside the home, a person might have no reasonable expectation of privacy according to the Court, and hence no Fourth Amendment protection against location tracking.

Some of the primary limitations on RFID have been size and detection distance. Size appears to no longer be much of an limitation anymore. As it becomes possible to detect RFID chips at greater distances, I believe they’ll increasingly be used to track people. Despite what appears to be an increasingly likely future possibility, the law doesn’t appear quite ready to address the privacy implications of RFID.

Hat tip: BoingBoing

Related Post: The RFID Tag You Carry With You (July, 2005)


 February 16, 2007 at 4:22 pm   Posted in: Privacy, Privacy (Law Enforcement)   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (4)

  1. Orin Kerr - February 16, 2007 at 7:20 pm

    Dan,

    Are you assuming that installing the RFID is not a search or seizure? As I understand it, right now there is a circuit split on whether the initial attachment of locating devices on a car is itself a search or seizure (a question not addressed due to bad lawyering in Knotts).

  2. Daniel J. Solove - February 16, 2007 at 7:25 pm

    Orin — Interesting point. I wasn’t aware of the circuit cases to this effect. I wonder to what extent they turn on how the device was attached versus whether they hold that no matter what the method of attachment, the use of an RFID tag to monitor movement is a search of seizure.

  3. Logical Extremes - February 16, 2007 at 9:29 pm

    I’d be a little surprised if these new micro-RFIDs have much of a detection distance, but they are quite scary nonetheless for being practically undetectable by potential victims.

  4. Carol Cross - May 28, 2009 at 2:31 pm

    RFID chips are here to stay and will eventually reduce the costs of the control of inventories at wholesale and retail level. While the author of the very excellent book “Spy Chips” indicates that the corporate world will misuse these chips and invade our privacy, I’m sure the commercial uses of the chips will override the “privacy” concerns and the corporate spies will win in the end.

    Hopefully, RFID chips, as suggested by MIT, who researched and helped to develop this technology, will mandate that merchants use the chips to prevent shoplifting and that the legalized extortion of “Civil Recovery” statutes for “apprehended” shoplifting detentions and arrests will become unnecessary.

    Someone at MIT suggested that Winona Ryder would have been spared her ordeal for shoplifting if RFID techology had been in place because the items she was found guilty of apprpriating and carrying outside of the store would have been automatically debited to her credit card.

Leave a Reply

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

Daniel J. Solove
Kaimipono Wenger
Dave Hoffman
Frank Pasquale
Deven Desai
Danielle Citron
Lawrence Cunningham
Sarah Waldeck
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Solangel Maldonado
Gerard Magliocca

Guests

Derek Bambauer
Gabriella Coleman
andré douglas pond cummings
David Gray
Brishen Rogers
Joseph Turow
Elizabeth A. Wilson













Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Marvin Ammori
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Taunya Lovell Banks
Ann Bartow
Steven Bellovin
Adam Benforado
Gaia Bernstein
Francesca Bignami
Josh Blackman
Joseph Blocher
Jeremy Blumenthal
Kathleen Boozang
Bruce Boyden
Donald Braman
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Ryan Calo
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Glenn Cohen
Jennifer Collins
Caroline Mala Corbin
Thomas Crocker
Allison Danner
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
Maxine Eichner
Jessica Erickson
David Fagundes
Lisa Fairfax
Joshua Fairfield
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Mary Anne Franks
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Brian Frye
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
Kyle Graham
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Jonathan Hafetz
Meredith Harbach
Michelle Harner
Jeffrey Harrison
Hosea Harvey
Erica Hashimoto
Jennifer Hendricks
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Gilbert A. Holmes
Nicole Huberfeld
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
Sherrilyn Ifill
John Ip
Shavar Jeffries
Kevin Johnson
Kristin Johnson
Jeff Jonas
Courtney Joslin
Dan Kahan
Jeffrey Kahn
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Alicia Kelly
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Alex Kreit
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
Youngjae Lee
Margaret Lewis
Erik Lillquist
Jeff Lipshaw
Jonathan Lipson
Jacqueline Lipton
Matthew Lister
Joseph Liu
Michael Madison
Kevin Noble Maillard
Solangel Maldonado
Jason Mazzone
Linda McClain
William McGeveran
Salil Mehra
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Max Minzner
Viva Moffat
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Angela Onwuachi-Willing
Michael O'Shea
David Opderback
Kristen Osenga
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
Michael J. Pitts
Marc Poirier
David Post
Amanda Pustilnik
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Marc Roark
Sasha Romanosky
Tuan Samahon
Susan Scafidi
David Schraub
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Judd Sneirson
Adam Steinman
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Olivier Sylvain
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Ari Waldman
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Melissa Waters
Frank Wu
Alfred Yen
Corey Yung
David Zaring
Timothy Zick
Michael Zimmer
Jonathan Zittrain

Ownership

Concurring Opinions is a
general-interest legal blog
operated by Concurring
Opinions LLC, a Pennsylvania
Limited Liability Corporation.

Blogroll

Above the Law
Access to Justice
ACS Blog
Althouse
Balkinization
Becker-Posner Blog
BlackProf
BoingBoing
Chicago Law Faculty Blog
Conglomerate
CrimLaw
Crime & Federalism
CrimProf Blog
Crooked Timber
Derechoalderecho
Discourse.net
Dorf on Law
Election Law
Emergent Chaos
The Faculty Lounge
Feminist Law Profs
43(B)log
Freakonomics Blog
Freedom to Tinker
Google Blogoscoped
How Appealing
Ideoblog
Info/Law
Instapundit.com
Juris Novus
Jurisdynamics
Just Books
Law and Humanities Blog
Law and Letters
Law Librarian Blog
Legal Profession Blog
Legal Theory Blog
Legal Times Blog
Leiter Reports
Brian Leiter's Law School Reports
Lessig Blog
Madisonian Theory
Media Law Blog
Mirror of Justice
The Moderate Voice
National Security Advisors
Opinio Juris
Point of Law
PrawfsBlawg
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Property Prof Blog
Red Tape Chronicles
The Right Coast
Schneier on Security
SCOTUSBlog
Security Dilemmas
Sentencing Law and Policy
Simple Justice
Sivacracy.net
The Situationist
Susan Crawford
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf Blog
TeachPrivacy Blog
Tech & Marketing Law
Truth on the Market
Volokh Conspiracy
WorkPlace Prof Blog
WSJ Law Blog
Wonkette
The Yin Blog


© Concurring Opinions

Powered by WordPress