On Monday, the Walt Disney Company (NYSE:DIS) announced an ambitious plan to transform the visitor experience at its Disney World Resort near Orlando, Fla. The MyMagic+ program, which will roll out this spring, combines an interactive website and mobile app with an all-purpose electronic bracelet that acts as a guest’s room key, theme-park ticket and payment account all rolled into one. The bracelets, dubbed MagicBands, will also track which rides visitors use, which characters they interact with, where they go and what they buy within the park.
The bracelets monitor behavior with radio-frequency identification technology, or RFID, a wireless tracking system that transfers from tiny tags attached to objects. RFID has long been used to track product inventory in various industries, but it has become increasingly invasive over the last decade, with tags being implanted in I.D. badges, transitcards and even passports. [/font]
Student Suspended for Refusing to Wear RFID Tracker Loses Lawsuit
Posted 13 January 2013 - 02:04 PM
Posted 13 January 2013 - 04:18 PM
Not really that much different than reward cards by grocery stores and best buy.
If someone dies not like using them they have a choice ...do not frequent private property owned by Disney.
We are not talking about personal or medical data. We are talking about what rides you get on or shops you frequent.
Posted 13 January 2013 - 04:49 PM
I think it's been ruled by the courts that the Free Exercise Clause protects religious beliefs, not religious practices that run counter to laws.
This is why you can't marry 4 women simply because you're religion says to do it. Or why you don't have to pay taxes because some of the money is used for war that might be against your region or pay for health insurance that covers birth control etc. etc. etc.
I think there is more to it then what I'm saying but there is a lot of precedent on the subject.
That was true at one point, but recent court rulings (in the last 50 years or so) have modified that stance to an extent. The court ruled that the government should respect religious practices unless there is a compelling state interest not to do so. There was a case in the 90's in which the courts struck down laws forbidding the killing of animals for anything other than food because they said it specifically targeted santeria rituals.
I don't think their rulings will have an impact on this case though. Sounds like they didn't have much of a case to begin with.
Posted 14 January 2013 - 08:57 PM
The courts have ruled that the constitution is limited for minors especially when it comes to schools and especially with regard to the 4th amendment. So I doubt this is unconstitutional. I don't particularly like it but as long as it is school grounds only I wouldn't care if my kid wore one.
As far as the question of religion, if we are going to protect religion then somebody will have to decide what is and isn't religion and it seems reasonable that that job would lie with the courts.
Freedom of religion has never been strictly upheld, nor should it be. Otherwise, religions that engage in cannibalism would be completely constitutional on public property.
What matters is freedom of open, unpopular expression, political or religious. Freedom of religious action, obviously, should end where anyone else has their rights infringed upon (i.e. religious violence against abortion).
Posted 15 January 2013 - 04:53 AM
Posted 15 January 2013 - 04:55 AM
Posted 15 January 2013 - 04:58 AM
Posted 15 January 2013 - 07:58 AM
Point being, I wouldn't worry too much about them being able to track students outside of the school. At least not without significant cooperation of the students.