WASHINGTON -- With millions of Americans -- knowingly or not -- carrying mobile tracking devices everywhere they go,

and a conservative House Republican said Wednesday they want to clarify the law for when law enforcement and businesses can gain access to that private information.

Wyden, a Democrat, is teaming with with

to update the legal standards surrounding the use "geolocation" data generated by cell phones, smart phones, GPS units, cameras and other popular devices that are a common part of everyday life.

“GPS technology is unquestionably a great tool, not just for Americans on the go and cellular companies offering services, but for law enforcement professionals looking to track suspects and catch criminals,” Wyden said. “But all tools and tactics require rules and right now, when it comes to geolocation information, the rules aren’t clear."

To correct that, Wyden and Chaffetz are offering legislation that would require law enforcement agencies to obtain a search warrant based on probable cause before location information can be collected. Requiring proof that the information is both useful, necessary and closely connected to a case is the same standard required for tapping a person's phone.

The legislation would also cover more sophisticated tracking devices that law enforcement agencies at times secretly install on people's cars and in other locations to precisely pinpoint their movements. As with cell phones, law enforcement agencies would be required to obtain a search warrant.

It also would prohibit commercial service providers from sharing customers’ geolocational information with outside entities without customer consent.

"Here's the bottom line - new tools require new rules," Wyden said during a news conference with Chaffetz in which they outlined the legislation.

"The law has yet to be updated to keep up pace with this new technological revolution," he said. "The legislation establishes a clear legal framework, a legal framework that is currently missing and that gives Americans confidence both that their priavcy rights are protected and law enformcent agencies can get information they legitimatly need."

Chaffetz agreed. "Quite frankly, the government and law enforcement should not be able to track somebody indefinitely without their knowledge or consent, or without obtaining a warrant from a judge," he said.

The two lawmakers are pitching the idea as beneficial to both owners of the cell phones and other devices who want more privacy protections as well as manufactures, service providers and law enforcement who currently must navigate differing and often contradictory legal guidance about what is allowed and what isn't.

"This law will incraese the clarity about what is acceptable what is not acceptable," Chaffetz said. "It is my view that law enforcement should get a search warrant if they are going track and follow an individual. The law needs to be clear and that's what this does. The last thing technology companies want is for people to be afraid of their phones."

Companies such as Verizon, Sprint and AT&T feel they are "between the dog and the hydrant," Michael Altschul, senior vice president and general counsel for CTIA, a trade group that represents the wireless communications industry said last year. "At the end of the day, the carriers want clarity."

Courts haven't helped, with judges in various locations issuing divergent -- at times contradictory -- rulings over the standards that government must meet when seeking data that can be intensely personal. Some magistrates have permitted the government to collect the information after insisting it is relevant to an ongoing case. That standard is far lower than probable cause, which some magistrates require. In those cases, authorities must show that the information is directly connected to an ongoing investigation and that probable cause of a crime exists.

The two lawmakers say new law is needed because existing law was written before the technology matured. Nor can the problem be solved by allowing wireless users to disable the location tracking features in their phones. Service providers must know where they are every moment because the phone's signal skips from one stationary cell pod to another during a call. This continues even when the phone is idle.

System operators review the data to find holes in service and other problems. Altschul said the records, which are kept anywhere from six months to two years, depending on the vendor, also are kept for tax and billing purposes. Most new-generation phones also have built-in GPS, which is used in many applications and helps police and emergency personnel find people in distress.

In areas blanketed with cell towers, the phone's location, and that of the person carrying it, can be determined within tens of feet by triangulating the signal with the cell towers. GPS is even more precise.

Wyden insisted the proposal is flexible enough to account for extraordinary situations. There would be exceptions in time of war and to act in an emergency with the understanding that a retroactive warrant would be sought. The privacy protections would extend only to U.S. citizens. Foreign nationals would have far fewer protections.

The legislation would also provide criminal penalties for surreptitiously using an electronic device to track a person's movements. That feature is aimed at hackers and stalkers. For instance, if a woman's ex-husband taps her phone, he is breaking the law. Wyden would treat hacking the woman's GPS to track her movements as a similar offense.

At the same time, some acts would be expressly allowed. The Federal Communications Commission, for example, requires location data to be freely offered to police and rescue officials during 9-1-1 calls. That capability has saved lives and is widely supported. Wyden said his legislation would not touch or diminish that authority.

--