Taylor Swift launches legal broadside at a college student who tracks private jets via public data
Taylor Swift launches legal broadside at a college student who tracks private jets via public data
When it comes to dealing with a Florida college student who uses public data and social media to track the private jets of billionaires, politicians and other celebrities, Taylor Swift apparently can’t just shake it off.
In late December, Swift’s camp hit Jack Sweeney, a junior studying information technology at the University of Central Florida, with a cease-and-desist letter that blamed his automated tracking of her private jet for tipping off stalkers as to her location. In the letter, attorneys from the law firm Venable accused Sweeney of effectively providing “individuals intent on harming her, or with nefarious or violent intentions, a roadmap to carry out their plans.”
Sweeney provided the link to that letter in an email to the Associated Press. In that message, he emphasized that while he has never intended to cause harm, he also believes strongly in the importance of transparency and public information.
“One should reasonably expect that their jet will be tracked, whether or not I’m the one doing it, as it is public information after all,” he wrote.
A spokesperson for Swift echoed the legal complaint, saying that “the timing of stalkers” suggests a connection to Sweeney’s flight-tracking sites. The spokesperson did not respond to questions seeking elaboration of that charge, such as whether stalkers have been seen waiting for Swift at the airport when her plane arrived or, alternatively, if there is evidence that stalkers have somehow inferred Swift’s subsequent location from the arrival time of her flight.
The legal letter likewise accuses Sweeney of “disregarding the personal safety of others”; “willful and repeated harassment of our client”; and “intentional, offensive, and outrageous conduct and consistent violations of our client’s privacy.”
Such statements are difficult to square with the fact that Sweeney’s automated tracking accounts merely repackage public data provided by the Federal Aviation Administration, a government agency. That fact did not dissuade the Venable attorneys, who demanded that Sweeney “immediately stop providing information about our client’s location to the public.”
You're viewing a single thread.
I have a legitimate question: why is this public information? Like.... I'm not taking sides either way, I just don't understand the reason that the current location of someone's private property (her jet) is considered public info. They location of someone's car or boat isn't publicly available.... So why a plane?
I understand that flight controllers need access to this info for logistics, but that's not really public. They also need access to air waves for communication and those are heavily regulated.
This system is called ADS-B. It's a peer to peer communication between airplanes where each plane will share its own data (flight level, speed, coordinates, flight number, etc.) and data from other planes by broadcasting it on same frequency as others. Result of this is that all the planes know where other nearby planes are located and their heading thus providing additional safety in avoiding collisions and other issues.
Data being broadcast in all directions means us on the ground can listen to them as well, which is what some sites are doing. Add internet to that mixture and we have a world coverage of every plane on the planet. You might wonder why data is not encrypted or something similar. There's nothing that can be abused about the data and all this tracking helps enormously with resolving incidents and other useful functionalities like precise arrival estimates and similar.
Now, since every airplane has a registration number, people figured out which plane was hers. Just like they know which plane Musk uses and many others. Data is recorded and known and completely legal, helpful even. If she has issues with this fact solution is rather simple. Get a charter flight or rent a plane and no one is the wiser. This is just rich people entitlement and the only way she can "win" this court case is to go a step further in stepping over the line which is to drown the poor man with legal expenses.
Edit: Oh, also location of boats is known. Not all boats, but commercial ones for sure. Their system is called AIS.
Thank you! This is exactly the kind of info I was wanting to see.
You are welcome. In order to receive this data one really doesn't need a lot. Some USB SDR dongle around ~30$ and software which is readily available. It's just like any other public service, free to listen to but license is needed to broadcast.
Part of the answer is "it's always been that way". All this is done in coordination with the FTC and there are certain frequencies assigned for aerial radio communication. It's not just done on 2.4GHz to be cheap like Wi-Fi / microwaves / etc.
Since the long-long-ago planes have been required to have their registered tail number visible. So if you do something not okay someone can find you and talk to you about it. After all cars are (mostly) limited to roads, boats are limited to waterways (and also have to have a name/number visible somewhere), planes can go anywhere and be annoying.
Radio communication to/from planes is just 'in the clear'. It's not encrypted because there isn't/wasn't a reason for it to be and for a long time it wasn't even possible. Encrypting it offers no benefit and many potential downsides. It's one more thing that can go wrong when you have a problem and need to talk to someone.
When tracking was upgraded to transponders ( a small radio dedicated to sending out info about who you are ) all that just stayed the same. They transmit a code you set and your altitude (and other info including tail number for newer ones/requirements after 2020 (just a coincidental year, the upgrade was planned years in advance)) so Air Traffic Control can say "Bugsmasher 123 turn left please". Radar is expensive, a device in the plane constantly broadcasting "plane here" is significantly simpler and cheaper to track. Most airports don't have Primary Radar.
ATC doesn't care about your tail number for tracking anything other that what to call you to get your attention on the radio. For your current flight, if you are using Flight Following (talking to ATC so they know where you are) or filing an Instrument Flight plan, they give you a semi-random transponder code for that flight. That is what they use for logistics. They don't care who you are, they care where you're going and when you're going to get there.
Tracking a tail number isn't much different from the <1900s version, which would be "weird the Mayflower is in port in Boston" or something.
Radio communication to/from planes is just ‘in the clear’. It’s not encrypted because there isn’t/wasn’t a reason for it to be and for a long time it wasn’t even possible. Encrypting it offers no benefit and many potential downsides. It’s one more thing that can go wrong when you have a problem and need to talk to someone.
There's tons of radio chatter one can listen to that's just blasted into the air with zero enceyption that you can pick up with an inexpensive radio scanner or SDR. Tons of first responders haven't updated to digital or encrypted radios (this will vary by state and municipality), railroad radio communication is often in the clear, as are boats and of course aircraft. There's a public database of crowd sources frequencies here:
That's a cool reference, thanks for sharing!
Thank you for the detailed info! This is the kind of response I was hoping for
Safety against air collisions.