Chatrie v. United States · ¶135

What was true about the bank records in Miller is true about Location History here. Chatrie voluntarily conveyed his location information to Google, and Google created a digital paper trail of that information. Like the bank in Miller, Google was no neutral custodian in this arrangement. Id., at 440. In exchange for allowing Chatrie to use its Location History service, Google could use his location information for its own business purposes, such as sending Chatrie location-targeted advertisements from third parties. 590 F. Supp. 3d, at 907–908. So, by giving Google his location information for its own use, Chatrie assumed the risk that Google might disclose location information to others, including the police. Miller, 425 U. S., at 443. Indeed, Google advises its users that the company could use their location information for its own advertising purposes and could share that information…

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.