The features of the car subscription raises the risk of government surveillance, the police records appear

What is also clear from the documents is that the American police realize that the monitoring companies have their ability to obtain the location of the car site, expressing fears that they can suddenly decide to kill some capabilities at any time.

In a letter sent in April 2024 to the Federal Trade Committee, Senator Ron Wayden and Edward Marki – Democrats in Oregon and Massachusetts did not prove – respectively – A group of automobile companiesFrom Toyota, Nissan and Sobaru, among other matters, ready to reveal the site’s website data in response to a summons without the court. Meanwhile, Volkswagen had its own arbitrary bases, limiting the summons notes to less than seven days of data. The members of the Senate indicated that these policies stand in contrast to the general pledges that were previously submitted by some car manufacturers to request a judicial order or a court order before the customer’s website is surrendered.

“Car industry companies differ greatly in the important issue of whether customers have been informed that they have been spied,” members of the Senate wrote. At the time of the message, Tesla only said a policy, they said, to inform customers about the legal demands. “Other car companies do not tell their customers about the government’s demands for their data, even if they are allowed.”

“We respect the privacy of our customers and take our responsibility to protect their personal information seriously,” says Bennett Ledman, a T-Mobile spokesman.

“Like all companies, we ask the law to provide law enforcement information and other government entities by compliance with court orders, summonses, and other legal discovery requests. Sections, we ask for a possible inspection or court order, except in emergency situations,” says AT & T Jim Kimberly.

Verizon did not respond to the comment.

Ryan Shapiro, CEO of People’s Property, a government healing company that has obtained the CHP display documents, says, says

Jay Stanley, chief policy analyst in the American Civil Liberties Union, notes that the police documents reviewed by WIRED contain fundamental details about monitoring cars that seem to be not available to the public, indicating that companies are more open with law enforcement more than they are with their customers.

“It is a continuous scandal that this type of monitoring occurs without people realizing this, not to mention giving permission to do so,” says Stanley. “If they make a monitoring of the public, the audience should know. They must have meaningful knowledge and give useful approval before activating any kind of monitoring, and this is not clearly the case.”