
Student Who Found GPS Device On His Car Due To Reddit Comment Sues The FBI - jedwhite
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110304/10254213366/student-who-found-gps-device-his-car-due-to-reddit-comment-sues-fbi.shtml
======
tptacek
For my little branch of this comment thread, can we leave aside the FBI's
reason for planting a GPS monitor? Just assume the FBI had no reason
whatsoever. That they did it randomly. I tend to agree that in this case, they
didn't seem to have a good reason. But, then:

Exactly what is the damage this guy suffered? What's he suing over?

Why should it be unconstitutional for the FBI to use technology to do
something they can _clearly_ already do without technology? It is not a
violation of your civil rights for an unmarked car to follow you around and
watch you.

There clearly is a line here, so let me foreclose on that response right up
front. Yes, it would be unconstitutional if the FBI tried to track all of us,
by making coded GPS monitors mandatory on all cars.

But in this case, if they couldn't plant the monitor, they could just follow
him. He'd have no case. It's almost exactly the same loss of privacy. So why
it such a big deal in the GPS case?

~~~
iujyhfgtrtgyhju
>Exactly what is the damage this guy suffered? What's he suing over?

That's what we are trying to find out! He was being spied on because he has a
foreign sounding name -

is he now on a no-fly list? is he on a secret do-no-hirelist for defense
companies? for telecoms companies? for any companies with govt contracts? Does
the FBI secretly OK who state colleges accept?

If being secretly tracked by the secret police is no real damage - at what
point is there damage? When the cattle trucks arrive ? Or when they get over
6Million

~~~
dhughes
> That's what we are trying to find out! He was being spied on because he has
> a foreign sounding name

That's the worst part, fixating on such a useless thing.

Imagine if the US and Canada went to war, I as a Canadian of Irish heritage
could easily blend in, meanwhile the French with accents would be targeted.
Meanwhile the people who don't fit a stereotype are planting bombs.

It's incredibly unprofessional, amateurish and ignorant for government
security agents to use such superficial reasons to think a person is a threat.

~~~
byrneseyeview
>It's incredibly unprofessional, amateurish and ignorant

I think the term you're looking for is "Bayesian," actually.

------
hollerith
If this is how they react to a comment on Reddit, just think of how much
quicker or more drastic their reaction to a similarly provocative comment on a
site with the ominous name _Hacker_ News.

("ominous name": Although the word _Hacker_ is not ominous to most of us, it
is to almost all non-technical members of the Washington establishment.)

~~~
acangiano
Prosecutor: "Is it true Mr. Hollerith that you self-identify as a hacker and
that you frequent a community of hackers known as Hacker News?"

You: "Yes, but..."

Prosecutor: "A simple yes or no will suffice."

You: "There are questions that can't be answered with a simple yes or no. For
example, you could ask me if I have stopped beating my wife."

Prosecutor: "Have you, Mr. Hollerith?"

In short, a jury of "peers" is not going to be comprised of peers. On average
they are people who have a poor grasp of logic, statistics, and the
personality of hackers. They'll judge you based on the way you look, talk,
etc... And since you are all Mr. Smarty Pants, members of the average jury
will not trust you, like you, or relate with you. As such, hacker types have a
major disadvantage in court, even before tossing around labels that are
considered as "shady" by the general public.

~~~
mcantor
Is it permissible in American courts to require the prosecutor to
unambiguously define "hacker" before answering?

If not, can you feign ignorance of the definition and explain that you are
thus literally incapable of providing an honest & informed answer; and since
you are under oath, require a definition before answering?

~~~
jrockway
"It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is."

------
davidk0101
All these goof-ups by the FBI don't paint a pretty picture about the agency at
all and I'm surprised some news agency isn't up in arms about their funding
and incompetence like they are with the teachers' unions.

~~~
raganwald
_All these goof-ups by the FBI don't paint a pretty picture about the agency_

Do you mean the agency founded by J. Edgar Hoover?

[https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/J._Edgar_Hoov...](https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/J._Edgar_Hoover)

Its founding principle was that there are baddies out there who need a special
force of investigators who have powers far exceeding the regular police and
who collect dossiers on suspicious citizens rather than simply waiting for
crimes to occur and then investigating.

In a certain sense, they aren't being incompetent, they're doing exactly what
they were designed to do. The problem isn't the execution, it's the mandate.

Here's another tidbit:

<https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/COINTELPRO>

~~~
davidk0101
I have no problem with the mandate. It's the clear lack of competence in
intelligence gathering that bothers me. Who honestly considers anything said
on reddit to be of any significant value to state security matters? They might
as well throw a dart on some board and make decisions that way if they are so
desperate as to use postings from reddit.

------
ajays
I'm sorry I'm late to this discussion, but: some people seem to be saying,
"what's the harm? what damage did he suffer?".

I'd like to point them to Kyllo -vs- United States
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States> . Basically, the USSC
ruled that taking a thermal image of a house amounted to "unreasonable
search". Even though the heat rays emanating from the dwelling can be
considered "public knowledge", the cops can't use it to then conclude that
there's a grow op in the house.

So, just because something is sorta "public" it doesn't mean the cops can
reach for it.

~~~
jeza
Wouldn't it be a little scary finding such a device in your car? At first, you
might wonder if it's linked to a a bomb. Then if you consider it's a tracking
device, who is actually following you? I'm sure it's enough to give some
people at least moderate anxiety and others possible severe. Who knows what
else.

------
aw3c2
actual and better source:
[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110303/ap_on_re_us/us_gps_track...](http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110303/ap_on_re_us/us_gps_tracking_warrants)

~~~
GHFigs
Much better source.

" _His lawyers say Afifi, who was born in the United States, was targeted
because of his extensive ties to the Middle East — he travels there
frequently, helps support two brothers who live in Egypt, and his father was a
well-known Islamic-American community leader who died last year in Egypt._ "

This is part of the story that TechDirt left out in favor of the inflammatory
but misleading man-persecuted-over-Reddit-comment angle.

~~~
furyg3
Replace the words with whatever country is 'scary' to you, and you've got
probable cause!

 _"His lawyers say Wing, who was born in the United States, was targeted
because of his extensive ties to asia — he travels there frequently, helps
support two brothers who live in China, and his father was a well-known Asian-
American community leader who died last year in China."_

Ridiculous... racism is not probable cause.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
>"well-known Islamic-American community leader"

This sort of comment I always assume is double-talk (government-ese maybe) for
someone who they know has close ties to terrorists. I'm guessing one of the
family has been undertaking some "terrorist" activities and that makes it look
bad for Afifi as he's sending money home. Of course this is speculation and
Afifi himself wouldn't likely know if it were true or not so I have no way of
knowing either.

~~~
Confusion
Martin Luther King was a "well-known Christian-American community leader".
That's how you should read it.

That you think otherwise means they already managed to indoctrinate you that
far, to accept the seeds of doubt and mistrust they try to plant. That way,
however it turns out, they are always right.

~~~
GHFigs
_That's how you should read it. That you think otherwise means they already
managed to indoctrinate you that far..._

What doctrine are you beholden to that gives you the right to declare someone
"indoctrinated" if they don't interpret things exactly as you do? Is no man
free to think for himself?

------
smutticus
What I don't get is why he had to give it back. Since the FBI stuck it to his
car isn't it his now? When they came to demand it back he should have refused.
Are they going to arrest him for harboring stolen property? They gave it to
him.

~~~
ErrantX
If I recall correctly he did ask for proof that it was theirs before he would
hand it back, but I seem to remember they refused and basically threatened him
into returning it.

~~~
Evgeny
What would they do to him if he just destroyed it as a suspicious, unknown,
but potentially dangerous object?

~~~
SandB0x
Or had "accidentally" dislodged it and attached it to a freight truck.

~~~
mcantor
"Jeez. This guy really drives a lot, for a student."

------
naner
He didn't find it "due to Reddit."

His mechanic noticed it when doing maintenance work (it was hidden improperly
and was an older, bulkier model). Then the kid posted a picture of it to
Reddit and asked what it was. Shortly after the FBI showed up at his house and
asked for it back.

~~~
mitcheme
I think the headline is supposed to mean that the GPS device was on his car
due to a Reddit comment.

It is a really awkward headline though.

------
waterlesscloud
Leaving aside the particulars of this case since all we've heard so far is
what his lawyers are saying happened, the troubling issue here is that somehow
attaching a GPS device is an action that does not require a warrant.

I can accept the argument that it doesn't gather information that couldn't be
gathered by other warrantless activity such as following him with agents.

But it also MUST require that they entered the personal property of his car.
You can't search a car without consent or a warrant, why can you enter it
without either?

------
Kilimanjaro
If they can plant a GPS in your car, what will stop them from planting a
microphone or video camera in your bedroom? Wiretapping is so common nowadays
that we don't even complain any more.

------
code_duck
The consensus here seems to be that the FBI crossed the line from passive to
active tracking, and should have needed a warrant, when they entered his
property to place the GPS device into his vehicle.

Tracking you by something like GPS on your cell phone doesn't require physical
interaction with your property. The effect is similar, though. What's the
difference?

------
printerjam
Open information systems (the internet) leads to all sorts of changes in
closed system (Middle Eastern governments, State Departments, the FBI). The
internet is fun again.

------
shennyg
Not sure if I missed it but what was the comment he posted that flagged him to
the FBI?

~~~
eapen
This was actually his friend's comment on Reddit.

[http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/ciiag/so_if_my_de...](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/ciiag/so_if_my_deodorant_could_be_a_bomb_why_are_you/c0sve5q)

