The following article was originally published on News5Cleveland.com and is published in the Ohio Capital Journal under a content-sharing agreement. Unlike other OCJ articles, it is not available for free republication by other news outlets as it is owned by WEWS in Cleveland.
A new bipartisan bill in the Ohio House would make tracking another person or their property without their consent, like with an Apple AirTag, a crime.
AirTags are Bluetooth tracking devices and can be very useful, helping owners find their missing keys or where they parked their car, however — some have been using the tools with much more sinister intentions, according to law enforcement.
Before Heidi Moon was killed in Akron back in Jan., she thought she was being stalked. She sought out an investigator who told News 5 he found an AirTag in her car.
In Feb., News 5 reported on a 29-year-old West Park woman who said a device was following her but fell off her car before she found it. She said she did find double-sided tape underneath her back bumper.
But even if someone took a device like that to police, they may not be able to do much.
“Right now, in Ohio, that’s not a law,” Rep. Tom Patton, a Republican from Strongsville, said. “It’s not a crime.”
Two Northeast Ohio lawmakers say as technology advances, laws need to keep up.
“There wasn’t anything that they could do to hold this person accountable for,” Rep. Emilia Sykes, a Democrat from Akron, said.
The lawmakers introduced House Bill 672, which would prohibit installing a tracking device on another person’s property without consent.
“Like in any new electronic creation, there’s some bad effects to it and some bad actors, miscreants will come out and they’ll use these AirTags for human trafficking or stalking,” Patton said.
With the increase of technology in which people can use them for not only good but evil, legislators have to be adjusting to those types of technology in order to make sure people feel safe and secure, Sykes said.
Under the proposed bill, violators could be charged with a first-degree misdemeanor.
There are some exceptions, such as the majority of cases with parents and minors, law enforcement or a caregiver for an elderly individual.
“We have to be mindful of privacy rights and constitutional rights, and we don’t want to infringe upon that,” Sykes said.
For the full list of exceptions, click or tap here.
There is also an exemption for when consent is automatically revoked. For example, if a couple separates or divorces, that consent is immediately revoked in order to ensure that people are remaining safe as relationships are changing, Skyes added.
The legislators say they were both stunned that this loophole existed, but Ray Ku, a Case Western Reserve University law professor, said the language is tricky.
“Interfering with someone’s body or property without their consent would generally be either trespass or battery,” Ku said. “So if I put a tag on your car, ‘I’m actually trespassing on your car’ versus ‘you don’t really have a right unless you have an expectation of privacy.’
He explains there is a potential argument that there is no privacy expectation since the information gathered from the Tag could be the same as from just seeing the individual in public.
“The actual recording or monitoring of where you are isn’t and couldn’t necessarily be actually made an offense,” Ku said, citing current law.
Ku specializes in constitutional law, internet law and data privacy. The bill is a good start, but he thinks it could be broader.
“Without focusing on the specific technology or the way it’s specifically embodied right now, we would be more concerned with the general idea of someone monitoring your location through any device — electronic or otherwise, known today or developed in the future, without your consent,” he said. “The main idea was we want to protect ourselves from being essentially stalked or trailed or otherwise surveilled everywhere we go.”
Because of how specific the language is in the bill, Ku said it would only impact devices specifically made for tracking.
“Interfering with someone’s body or property without their consent would generally be either trespass or battery,” Ku said. “So if I put a tag on your car, ‘I’m actually trespassing on your car’ versus ‘you don’t really have a right unless you have an expectation of privacy.’
He explains there is a potential argument that there is no privacy expectation since the information gathered from the Tag could be the same as from just seeing the individual in public.
“The actual recording or monitoring of where you are isn’t and couldn’t necessarily be actually made an offense,” Ku said, citing current law.
Ku specializes in constitutional law, internet law and data privacy. The bill is a good start, but he thinks it could be broader.
“Without focusing on the specific technology or the way it’s specifically embodied right now, we would be more concerned with the general idea of someone monitoring your location through any device — electronic or otherwise, known today or developed in the future, without your consent,” he said. “The main idea was we want to protect ourselves from being essentially stalked or trailed or otherwise surveilled everywhere we go.”
Because of how specific the language is in the bill, Ku said it would only impact devices specifically made for tracking.
As of right now, there are no public opponents. The biggest problem is timing.
It is relatively late to be introducing a new bill into the Legislature, but the representatives hope that lawmakers will see the need for this protection and quickly push the bill forward.
In the meantime, if you notice that you are being tracked by an AirTag, Apple says there is a way to disable the tracking.
They published an AirTag safety guide here with a link to an app for Android users that may be being tracked, as well.
“Apple has done some things like creating some alert systems,” Sykes said. “But that’s something that the tech companies are going to have to help us figure out so that these types of technologies are not misused and create situations, in which there are dangerous situations or liability being attached.”
She is hopeful that the tech companies will also be willing to work alongside lawmakers to make sure that the technologies that they’re putting on the market are also safe and being used correctly, she said.
Ku warns that getting tech companies involved requires careful balance.
“Where that device goes is something that the company, for example, like Apple, can’t control at all,” he said. “And if they could, we might be more concerned that the remedy would be worse than the actual crime or violation.”
“You wouldn’t necessarily want Apple to know exactly where your device was at any given time.”
If you are being tracked, once you are in a safe area, there is also a way for you to cause the AirTag to play a sound to help you find it. The notification will also give you the serial numbers of the device, which can help law enforcement and Apple find out who it is registered to.
The best option is to drive directly to a police station, according to tech experts and police.
Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
▪ You must give Ohio Capital Journal credit, including https://ohiocapitaljournal.com and author.
▪ If you publish online, include the links from the story, and a link to Ohio Capital Journal.
▪ Stories may be edited for in-house style or to shorten. More substantial changes should be noted as additional and conducted by your publication.
▪ You can publish our graphics and any photos that are credited to Ohio Capital Journal with the stories with which they originally appeared. For any other uses, you must seek permission from us at [email protected]
▪ If you share the story on social media, please mention @OhioCapJournal on Twitter and ohiocapitaljournal on Facebook.
▪ Don’t sell ads against the story. Feel free, however, to publish it on a page with ads you’ve already sold.
▪ Content should not be published behind a paywall; please reach out to the editor-in-chief if you have questions about your particular paywall system.
by Morgan Trau, Ohio Capital Journal May 18, 2022
The following article was originally published on News5Cleveland.com and is published in the Ohio Capital Journal under a content-sharing agreement. Unlike other OCJ articles, it is not available for free republication by other news outlets as it is owned by WEWS in Cleveland. .singleRepublisherRow {display:none;}
A new bipartisan bill in the Ohio House would make tracking another person or their property without their consent, like with an Apple AirTag, a crime.
AirTags are Bluetooth tracking devices and can be very useful, helping owners find their missing keys or where they parked their car, however — some have been using the tools with much more sinister intentions, according to law enforcement.
Before Heidi Moon was killed in Akron back in Jan., she thought she was being stalked. She sought out an investigator who told News 5 he found an AirTag in her car.
In Feb., News 5 reported on a 29-year-old West Park woman who said a device was following her but fell off her car before she found it. She said she did find double-sided tape underneath her back bumper.
But even if someone took a device like that to police, they may not be able to do much.
“Right now, in Ohio, that’s not a law,” Rep. Tom Patton, a Republican from Strongsville, said. “It’s not a crime.”
Two Northeast Ohio lawmakers say as technology advances, laws need to keep up.
“There wasn’t anything that they could do to hold this person accountable for,” Rep. Emilia Sykes, a Democrat from Akron, said.
The lawmakers introduced House Bill 672, which would prohibit installing a tracking device on another person’s property without consent.
“Like in any new electronic creation, there’s some bad effects to it and some bad actors, miscreants will come out and they’ll use these AirTags for human trafficking or stalking,” Patton said.
With the increase of technology in which people can use them for not only good but evil, legislators have to be adjusting to those types of technology in order to make sure people feel safe and secure, Sykes said.
Under the proposed bill, violators could be charged with a first-degree misdemeanor.
There are some exceptions, such as the majority of cases with parents and minors, law enforcement or a caregiver for an elderly individual.
“We have to be mindful of privacy rights and constitutional rights, and we don’t want to infringe upon that,” Sykes said.
For the full list of exceptions, click or tap here.
There is also an exemption for when consent is automatically revoked. For example, if a couple separates or divorces, that consent is immediately revoked in order to ensure that people are remaining safe as relationships are changing, Skyes added.
The legislators say they were both stunned that this loophole existed, but Ray Ku, a Case Western Reserve University law professor, said the language is tricky.
“Interfering with someone’s body or property without their consent would generally be either trespass or battery,” Ku said. “So if I put a tag on your car, ‘I’m actually trespassing on your car’ versus ‘you don’t really have a right unless you have an expectation of privacy.’
He explains there is a potential argument that there is no privacy expectation since the information gathered from the Tag could be the same as from just seeing the individual in public.
“The actual recording or monitoring of where you are isn’t and couldn’t necessarily be actually made an offense,” Ku said, citing current law.
Ku specializes in constitutional law, internet law and data privacy. The bill is a good start, but he thinks it could be broader.
“Without focusing on the specific technology or the way it’s specifically embodied right now, we would be more concerned with the general idea of someone monitoring your location through any device — electronic or otherwise, known today or developed in the future, without your consent,” he said. “The main idea was we want to protect ourselves from being essentially stalked or trailed or otherwise surveilled everywhere we go.”
Because of how specific the language is in the bill, Ku said it would only impact devices specifically made for tracking.
“Interfering with someone’s body or property without their consent would generally be either trespass or battery,” Ku said. “So if I put a tag on your car, ‘I’m actually trespassing on your car’ versus ‘you don’t really have a right unless you have an expectation of privacy.’
He explains there is a potential argument that there is no privacy expectation since the information gathered from the Tag could be the same as from just seeing the individual in public.
“The actual recording or monitoring of where you are isn’t and couldn’t necessarily be actually made an offense,” Ku said, citing current law.
Ku specializes in constitutional law, internet law and data privacy. The bill is a good start, but he thinks it could be broader.
“Without focusing on the specific technology or the way it’s specifically embodied right now, we would be more concerned with the general idea of someone monitoring your location through any device — electronic or otherwise, known today or developed in the future, without your consent,” he said. “The main idea was we want to protect ourselves from being essentially stalked or trailed or otherwise surveilled everywhere we go.”
Because of how specific the language is in the bill, Ku said it would only impact devices specifically made for tracking.
As of right now, there are no public opponents. The biggest problem is timing.
It is relatively late to be introducing a new bill into the Legislature, but the representatives hope that lawmakers will see the need for this protection and quickly push the bill forward.
In the meantime, if you notice that you are being tracked by an AirTag, Apple says there is a way to disable the tracking.
They published an AirTag safety guide here with a link to an app for Android users that may be being tracked, as well.
“Apple has done some things like creating some alert systems,” Sykes said. “But that’s something that the tech companies are going to have to help us figure out so that these types of technologies are not misused and create situations, in which there are dangerous situations or liability being attached.”
She is hopeful that the tech companies will also be willing to work alongside lawmakers to make sure that the technologies that they’re putting on the market are also safe and being used correctly, she said.
Ku warns that getting tech companies involved requires careful balance.
“Where that device goes is something that the company, for example, like Apple, can’t control at all,” he said. “And if they could, we might be more concerned that the remedy would be worse than the actual crime or violation.”
“You wouldn’t necessarily want Apple to know exactly where your device was at any given time.”
If you are being tracked, once you are in a safe area, there is also a way for you to cause the AirTag to play a sound to help you find it. The notification will also give you the serial numbers of the device, which can help law enforcement and Apple find out who it is registered to.
The best option is to drive directly to a police station, according to tech experts and police.
Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Ohio Capital Journal is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David DeWitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on Facebook and Twitter.
Our stories may be republished online or in print under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. We ask that you edit only for style or to shorten, provide proper attribution and link to our web site. Please see our republishing guidelines for use of photos and graphics.
Morgan Trau is a political reporter and multimedia journalist based out of the WEWS Columbus Bureau. A graduate of Syracuse University’s S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications, Trau has previously worked as an investigative, political and fact-checking reporter in Grand Rapids, Mich. at WZZM-TV; a reporter and MMJ in Spokane, Wash. at KREM-TV and has interned at 60 Minutes and worked for CBS Interactive and PBS NewsHour.
The Ohio Capital Journal is an independent, nonprofit news organization dedicated to connecting Ohioans to their state government and its impact on their lives. The Capital Journal combines Ohio state government coverage with incisive investigative journalism, reporting on the consequences of policy, political insight and principled commentary.
DEIJ Policy | Ethics Policy | Privacy Policy
Our stories may be republished online or in print under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. We ask that you edit only for style or to shorten, provide proper attribution and link to our web site.