How does art 10 European COnvention on Human Rights apply to this?
ARTICLE 10
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. this right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html#C.Art10
Part 2 of this article needs to be very very carefully motivated if they want to use this. Foxytag does nothing then to gather and distribute information. This article is ment in such a way that the term information is very wide. Now, public safety: they need to proof and motivate that Foxytag, or any other kind of warning equipement, like GPS devices, or radardetectors is a direct danger to public safety.
Now, you have the Mori report. There are also other reports that say that people driving with a detector drive safer. So public safety is not in danger, even better; public safety would be served by allowing these devices.
The part that radiostations do is also distribute information. Art 10 is made so governemnts cannot censor this.