Indian GPS Cartographers Charged As Terrorists 269
chrb writes "Following on from the discussion about Apple disabling GPS in Egyptian iPhones, we have a new case of the conflict between the traditional secrecy of government, and the widening availability of cheap, accurate GPS devices around the world. On 5th December, two software engineers employed by Biond Software in India were arrested for mapping highways using vehicle based GPS devices. Further evidence against the pair emerged when it was found that a laptop they had been using in the car contained some photos of the local airforce base. The company claims they had been commissioned by Nokia Navigator to create maps of local roads and terrain. Following an investigation by the Anti Terrorist Squad of Gujarat the cartographers have now been charged with violating the Official
Secrets Act and will remain in custody."
Re:Crazy Indians? (Score:5, Interesting)
The convoy was supposed to detour around the town and instead turned directly into it, eventually running into an ambush. The ambush was unlikely to have been set up in advance, because the Iraqis did not know which course the convoy would take. The navigational error has never been properly explained, because the soldiers had GPS receivers and maps
My buddy revealed that it was common knowledge in the sandbox that the Officer in charge of the convoy, Capt. Troy Kent King, was the one who was responsible for making the wrong turns. According to google searches, the report is classified Secret and so the official cause is still "unknown".
So that's what happens when LT's with a map and compass go on to become captains.
Re:With a name like "The Official Secrets Act" (Score:3, Interesting)
"You are in violation of the Official Secrets Act, you are under arrest."
Correction: That's the Official Secrets Act of 1923.
From TFA, here's what got led to the charges:
Presumably, everything they recorded was viewable from public roadways since neither linked articles mentioned anything about criminal trespassing. I wonder how many of India's citizenry or tourists know about the ban on photographing those areas? Were there any signs posted? Anyway the whole mess sounds like an overreaction due to the Mumbai shootings.
Re:Well (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, you can be detained for doing that in the US too. Not sure what exactly they charge you with.
Really? I wonder what happened to the Google employees who took these photos [google.com]?
Trying to keep an open mind... (Score:1, Interesting)
I'm trying to keep an open mind about the government charging these guys and not just say the government is evil. But time and time again, governments around the world have shown they aren't interested in whats right, they are interested in controlling the population.
Republics, Democracies, Communist, the type of government doesn't matter. The only thing that seems to matter is that those at the top, stay at the top and in control of those around them.
With all of the differing views around the planet, all of the different ways of thinking and ways of living from one culture to the next, one thing isn't different. Those at the top are doing everything possible to control those around them.
Makes the conspiracy theorist alarm in my head go off.
Re:Well (Score:1, Interesting)
I realize that Guantanamo isn't a resort, but I'd feel much safer there than in an Indian jail.
You're kidding, right? This is the place that keeps prisoners hooded and shackled even AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN RELEASED.
Re:Crazy Indians? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Charged As Terrorists? (Score:1, Interesting)
Ironically, this makes the job a lot easier for the opposition. All the Pakis have to do is aim their missiles at the black/blank/low-res squares on the sattelite maps. That way they're bound to hit something they're not supposed to know about if a conflict ever occurs.
Actually, the smarter thing is to show some limited detail of the base (but not to the point where the resolution drop is noticable) but not allow any timely release of information. That is, you can show the base - but whatever data is released must be more than a month old. That way the data is mostly useless from an intelligence perspective.
Re:Official Secrets Act != Terrorism Charge (Score:5, Interesting)
Still better than Britain where you can get arrested or harressed for taking photographs anywhere the police do not like it. [amateurpho...pher.co.uk].
Re:Official Secrets Act != Terrorism Charge (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, no, you can legally photograph nearly everything you can see from public land in the US. There are a few places where they're known to lack a sense of humor about it, but almost everything is fair game. (That said, there are a few rare restrictions on such things.)
Now understanding that this is the law in your country, and it is (apparently) clearly posted, well... yeah, they broke the law and got caught. As usual, /. distorts the story.
As to US laws, here's what 18 USC 795 has to say (in part).
"Whenever, in the interests of national defense, the President defines certain vital military and naval installations or equipment as requiring protection against the general dissemination of information relative thereto, it shall be unlawful to make any photograph, sketch, picture, drawing, map, or graphical representation of such vital military and naval installations or equipment without first obtaining permission of the commanding officer of the military or naval post, camp, or station, or naval vessels, military and naval aircraft, and any separate military or naval command concerned, or higher authority, and promptly submitting the product obtained to such commanding officer or higher authority for censorship or such other action as he may deem necessary."
Executive Order 10104, 1 Feb 1950:
"... it shall be unlawful to make any photograph, sketch, picture, drawing, map, or graphical representation of such vital military and naval installations or equipment..."
Atomic Energy Commission, US Code, Title 42, Cap 23, Div A, Subchap XVII, Sec 2278b:
"It shall be an offense...to make any photograph, sketch, picture, drawing, map or graphical representation, while present on property subject to the jurisdiction, administration or in the custody of the Commission."
The laws w.r.t. photography/videography/general data-gathering concerning anything that could be construed as sensitive are very broad, and enforcement and interpretation varies enormously. Making assumptions here can get one in deep trouble very quickly with many large, angry, heavily-armed men, one of which might be thinking to himself; "I wonder if I could just shoot this idiot? If my buddy Smitty is Officer Of The Day today, he'd probably cover me in the report.".
Cheers!
Strat
Re:Charged As Terrorists? (Score:4, Interesting)
For some reason this reminds me of telemarketers' Do Not Call list.
Or the "opt out" link on spam, whereby one can click to say, "Yes, I'm here and I read my spam, so please stop sending it."
Re:Crazy Indians? (Score:5, Interesting)
Fresh officers (boots, butterbars, third-butter-cutter, all sorts of names for them) out of officer school are all hot to show their Stuff. Typically, within weeks of commissioning they were given a platoon of men to lead. As the head cheese, it is their responsibility to get the platoon where it needs to go.
These guys are around 22 years old. In this platoon, you are sure to have one old salt, and a couple on their way. The unwritten rule is to make sure the butterbar has adult supervision in the form of a senior non-com. This senior non-com goes out of his way _not_ to make decisions. So, you will hear plenty of stories about how a platoon gets hopelessly lost while the non-coms who could have 'prevented' the tragedy do nothing. The officers learn from their mistakes with the benefit of senior non-coms as training wheels.
In modern times, the officers go through some OJT as an exec. or something in addition to the more extensive field training currently in the system.
1-way encryption (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Official Secrets Act != Terrorism Charge (Score:3, Interesting)
The British police are also interested in those odd people who walk around with GPS devices and then start drawing maps in a cafe [glasgownet.com]. OpenStreetMappers beware.
Re:Crazy Indians? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Charged As Terrorists? (Score:1, Interesting)
Yes, we otherwise wouldn't know that the runway intersection at Jamnagat AFS is at 22 deg 27'59.71"N 70 deg 00'40.82"E and the there are lots of MiG 21s there.
Posting AC just in case...
History repeats itself ... again (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:With a name like "The Official Secrets Act" (Score:1, Interesting)
Indian law is drawn from British law. There are still many remnants in it today. Some of these laws have been long disbanded in Britain itself but continue to be active in India, since after independence, India did not look at British law for guidance, quite appropriately.
Good examples are the anti-gay laws. Ancient India was not anti-gay but British law was and even though Britain has opened up, the independent India has not updated it since. This is simply a matter of slow bureaucracy and limited activism rather than anything else.
Re:Official Secrets Act != Terrorism Charge (Score:4, Interesting)
Not so rare any more. Pretty much all the tunnels & bridges in NYC are "no photo" zones. Take a look at this entertaining gallery for examples.
All part of the War on Photographers. [popphoto.com]
Re:Official Secrets Act != Terrorism Charge (Score:3, Interesting)
The husband likes taking pictures of industrial structures as reference for his model railroad. His job was taking him all over the country at this point.
He was on a road when he saw an interesting building he decided to photograph. So he did. Very soon after that a rent-a-cop came puffing up the hill and told him he couldn't do that.
Next he was demanding that my husband give him the camera. Uh, no. Then he demanded that all the photos (including all the other ones that had nothing to do with this situation) be deleted. Uh, no. Eventually my husband got bored with the whole thing and just walked away. There was nothing the guy could really do as this was all taking place on a public highway and a building in plain view.
Here in the US, he could get away with it. I don't know about other places. But just because 'someone' says you can't do it doesn't mean they're right. And sadly most people will cave when someone perceived to be an authority figure demands something.
Re:Crazy Indians? (Score:4, Interesting)
The Blue Force Tracker system is an OK navigation system. The daggers, military hand held GPS sytems, are total and complete shit. Your lucky if you can find your own ass with one of those things.
When I first got into Iraq, we where told we didn't need strip maps because our convoy commander had a GPS and and "had driven the route dozens of times." We took several wrong turns in Baghdad and were lost for over an hour. We ran into a EOD cordon around an IED, and they pointed us in the right direction. On the up side, we missed 2 IED's along our planned route.
Re:Official Secrets Act != Terrorism Charge (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, no, you can legally photograph nearly everything you can see from public land in the US. There are a few places where they're known to lack a sense of humor about it, but almost everything is fair game. (That said, there are a few rare restrictions on such things.)
Now understanding that this is the law in your country, and it is (apparently) clearly posted, well... yeah, they broke the law and got caught. As usual, /. distorts the story.
Actually, no, you cannot take pictures of many US Military installations. I was one of the guys who would apprehend you and take your camera from you. Please don't speak for America if you don't know enough to tell the truth.
Re:Crazy Indians? (Score:1, Interesting)
We used to say that a 2lt could choose from two of the following:
1. Live troops
2. Live rounds
3. Map & Compass.
Only platoon sargeants can be trusted with all three!
Re:Official Secrets Act != Terrorism Charge (Score:3, Interesting)
Not true. These no-photo rules were imposed in the security-frenzy that was NYC immediately after 9/11. When things calmed down objections were raised by citizens and the rules were rescinded. In 2007, revised rules about commercial street photography in NYC specifically allowed photogrphy by ordinary citizens and visitors.
That does not mean that a lot of people, including cops, don't know or care that the rules were changed back to allow photography. Those signs you linked to are probably still there because their removal is at the bottom of the city's To-Do list. If they are true to form the city might get around to taking them down around 2020.
In any event they were the dumbest rules ever devised. If I were a terrorist i could take 10,000 secret pictures of subways, bridges and train stations and no one would ever know. What was the the point of hassling John or Mary from Debuque?
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)