Sen. Franken's Bill to Ban Stalker Apps Ignores the Biggest Stalker of All

Senator Al Franken wants to give users more control over their location data and privacy. The simply-named Location Privacy Protection Act of 2014 goes after tech companies that mine GPS data—especially GPS tracking apps—and stalkers who abuse this location data.

But, as Franken noted in his bill's text and a video release, absent from the bill is any text limiting government access to location data. Franken's bill was discussed in a Senate hearing yesterday in the Committee on the Judiciary, where he lambasted affronts to privacy by so-called "stalking app" makers.

“The companies that make the software on your phone, including apps, can access extremely sensitive location data that reveals … the church you attend and the doctors you visit,” Franken (D-MN) said in a statement. “I believe Americans have the right to control that information. But right now, companies—some legitimate, some not—are collecting your location and giving it to whatever you choose. ”

Franken admits in the video release that GPS data can be helpful in navigating cities and finding locations, but gave one example of how it can go horribly wrong. "I'm talking about the abuse of the technology," he said. "For example, when I started investigating this as the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Privacy, the first testimony I received was from the Minnesota Coalition for Battered Women."

In testimony, the coalition told Franken a story about a woman who went to a county building for a domestic violence program, where she received a message from her abuser, asking why she was at the county building. The coalition promptly took her to a court house to get a restraining order, where the woman received yet another text from her abuser, asking, "Are you getting a restraining order?"

This type of stalking terror illustrates the power of tracking apps for smartphones, which are nominally used to ensure children or employees don't wander where they shouldn't, but also make stalking a hell of a lot easier.

Franken's bill attacks the stalker issue head-on, but makes a few exceptions for other individuals, including: parents or legal guardians locating an "unemancipated child or ward"; court-ordered guardians locating incapacitated persons; fire, medical, public safety, or other emergency services personnel; law enforcement officials requesting the data; and network administrators, among a few others.

"My bill would shut down these apps once and for all," said Franken in the hearing's opening statement. "It would clearly prohibit making, running, and selling apps and other devices that are designed to help stalkers track their victims."

"But my bill doesn't protect just victims of stalking: it protects everyone who uses a smartphone, an in-car navigation device, or any mobile device connected to the Internet," he later continued. "I think that we all have a fundamental right to privacy: a right to control who gets your sensitive information, and with whom they share it. Someone who has a record of your location doesn't just know where you live. They know where you work and where you drop your kids off at school. They know the church you attend, and the doctors you visit."

Under Franken's bill, app makers would have to obtain data collection consent from users, but also provide a "clear, prominent, and accurate notice to the individual, not earlier than 24 hours and not later than 7 days after the initial collection, informing the individual that his or her geolocation information is being collected." App makers would also be forced to provide a publicly accessible website that includes information on the nature of the location data, why it was collected and with whom it was shared, and an explanation of how user consent can be revoked.

As hinted at above, a concern with Franken's bill is that it only deals with "covered entities"—that is, non-governmental companies, organizations, and individuals. Again, more plainly, tech companies, app makers, and stalkers. With today being the one-year anniversary of Edward Snowden's NSA leaks, it's a shame that the bill fails to contain language expressly limiting government access to GPS data.

As PopVox noted in its description of the legislation, most bills don't get beyond a committee hearing. Perhaps this is a blessing in disguise for the Location Privacy Protection Act. As it makes its way through the legislative process, hopefully the bill receives commentary from advocates who don't think privacy protections stop with the government.