Great judgment. But if I was an overly cynical person, here's where I could see this going:
Data gathered by voluntarily-placed GPS units aren't covered by the ruling. If they want the data, the onus is then on cities to create incentives to place GPS units voluntarily.
Initiatives are started to link road tax to miles driven in any given county - which requires GPS to check.
Cars suddenly begin to have built-in GPS transmission not just for OnStar, but for other applications, like Facebook.
The car becomes a platform, and suddenly laws are enacted that effectively require private citizens to report data to law enforcement.
Law enforcement gets to track _all_ drivers without a warrant.
(Not that I'm arguing for a different ruling - this is great - but I don't trust the government not to take surveillance to its maximum possible level given current technology.)
Data gathered by voluntarily-placed GPS units aren't covered by the ruling. If they want the data, the onus is then on cities to create incentives to place GPS units voluntarily.
Initiatives are started to link road tax to miles driven in any given county - which requires GPS to check.
Cars suddenly begin to have built-in GPS transmission not just for OnStar, but for other applications, like Facebook.
The car becomes a platform, and suddenly laws are enacted that effectively require private citizens to report data to law enforcement.
Law enforcement gets to track _all_ drivers without a warrant.
(Not that I'm arguing for a different ruling - this is great - but I don't trust the government not to take surveillance to its maximum possible level given current technology.)