谷歌已不再以易受地理围栏搜查令影响的方式收集此类信息，更重要的是，苹果从未这样做过。
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that privacy protections under the Fourth Amendment apply to cellphone location history, requiring warrants for law enforcement to access geofence data. The decision bolsters digital privacy rights in an era of pervasive tracking technology.
The Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution's Fourth Amendment protects individuals' location history, requiring police to obtain a warrant before accessing cellphone location data. The decision marks a significant expansion of digital privacy rights in the context of modern technology.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution's Fourth Amendment protects people's location data, requiring law enforcement to obtain a warrant before accessing cell phone location records from third parties like phone companies. The decision marks a major privacy victory, recognizing that long-term tracking of a person's movements violates reasonable expectations of privacy.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement's use of a "geofence warrant" to obtain location data from Google constitutes a "search" under the Fourth Amendment, requiring probable cause and a warrant. The decision curtails the ability of police to demand tech companies for anonymous location data of everyone near a crime scene without individualized suspicion.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that geofence warrants are subject to Fourth Amendment privacy protections, requiring police to get a warrant based on probable cause. The decision restricts law enforcement from demanding bulk location data from tech companies for all devices near a crime scene.