And why do they think Apple sold their information, have the never put their zip code on any other transaction, such as a purchase from Amazon? In the UK credit agencies purchase the electoral roll from local authorities. This would be a more likely way for junk mail distributors to get their addresses.
...and if not thrown out then settled quickly. Discovery in a privacy case seldom comes out well IMO. There will be something somewhere that would reflect poorly on Apple. Doesn't the media always find something?
I doubt there will be any 'settling'. I simply don't believe any of this this in the first place. This is Apple not Google or Amazon we are discussing here. Since when did Apple ever 'sell' user information to a third party that you know of? By the way, it's worth mentioning to those folks in MA, I don't know about them, but I can't buy gas at a gas station with my Amex card without putting in my zip code these days.
I had a consumer come up to me in Wisconsin at my sales table who objected to me taking his address information of a credit card transaction. Said it was a violation of state law. I simply said, "Then I won't sell this to you!" He changed his mind. I should have gotten him to write on a slip of paper that he did indeed to asset in case later he changed his tune.
Did this clown object at the time this was done? Apple doesn't need freaks like this to make a bigger pile of cash (which will go mostly for the ambulance chasers).
What you did and Apple did are different. With a zip code, Apple is not obtaining your address. It is merely verifying that you know a piece of information that the card holder gave to his or her credit card company. Apple can't use that information to send you stuff in the mail. It, however, collects your address voluntarily after a sale if you register a product. I have never received mail from third parties that was likely tied to an Apple purchase. This is no different than what happens at many gas pumps.
You on the other hand asked for highly personal information. I would never give a vendor my address or phone number as a condition of sale. Often times merchants ask for my phone number, and I always decline to provide it. Regardless of what your intent might be, I simply do not think a merchant is entitled to that information. In my case, you would have lost a sale. You should also check with Visa, MasterCard, discover, or American Express. Asking for that information might violate the card companies terms and conditions. For example, many people don't know a merchant who accepts visa cannot require at least five dollars be spent to use the card.
I doubt there will be any 'settling'. I simply don't believe any of this this in the first place. This is Apple not Google or Amazon we are discussing here. Since when did Apple ever 'sell' user information to a third party that you know of? By the way, it's worth mentioning to those folks in MA, I don't know about them, but I can't buy gas at a gas station with my Amex card without putting in my zip code these days.
I'm not aware of any instances where either Apple or Google sold information to a third party. I doubt you know of one even concerning Google but if you do please share it.
Amazon I've no idea about but I suspect they may.
Anyway, that's not the point. If the case is allowed to go forward with that claim in place I don't think Apple will be eager to have attorneys filing discovery requests on how Apple specifically shares information collected on it's users. It won't really matter if it's actually sold. Once those discovery orders are complied with the details will somehow"leak" to the media who's nearly guaranteed to find some juicy privacy angle for eyeballs. Before things get to that point I'm personally convinced Apple would find a way to settle it.
I doubt there will be any 'settling'. I simply don't believe any of this this in the first place. This is Apple not Google or Amazon we are discussing here. Since when did Apple ever 'sell' user information to a third party that you know of? By the way, it's worth mentioning to those folks in MA, I don't know about them, but I can't buy gas at a gas station with my Amex card without putting in my zip code these days.
I'm not aware of any instances where either Apple or Google sold information to a third party. I doubt you know of one even concerning Google but if you do please share it.
Amazon I've no idea about but I suspect they may.
Anyway, that's not the point. If the case is allowed to go forward with that claim in place I don't think Apple will be eager to have attorneys filing discovery requests on how Apple specifically shares information collected on it's users. It won't really matter if it's actually sold. Once those discovery orders are complied with the details will somehow"leak" to the media who's nearly guaranteed to find some juicy privacy angle for eyeballs. Before things get to that point I'm personally convinced Apple would find a way to settle it.
Does it actually work like that? Can one make a random accusation of data misuse without any evidence, and then require the defendant to prove, via a discovery process, that they did not misuse the data?
True for gas stations. But I've never been asked for my zip code to verify a credit card transaction that I made in store. However I am from California which may be different from other states such as Massachusetts.
I've been asked my zip code and phone number at Best Buy before when I used cash, but I loudly yelled at the cashier that I was not under any obligation to provide any personal information for a cash purchase. They quit asking.
Does it actually work like that? Can one make a random accusation of data misuse without any evidence, and then require the defendant to prove, via a discovery process, that they did not misuse the data?
That's what lawyers call a fishing expedition. You must be able to cite a specific incident or documentation. You cannot simply say, "turn over everything you have".
Does it actually work like that? Can one make a random accusation of data misuse without any evidence, and then require the defendant to prove, via a discovery process, that they did not misuse the data?
They already suppose tohave enough proof to make the claim. It depends whether the judge agrees they met the minimum burden to order discovery on that claim. He may or may not.
I've been asked my zip code and phone number at Best Buy before when I used cash, but I loudly yelled at the cashier that I was not under any obligation to provide any personal information for a cash purchase. They quit asking.
Brilliant. Yelling, at a minimum wage kid trying to do the job the boss told him/her to do. The kid didn't make the policy, but the kid gets fired if s/he doesn't do as instructed.
Ya know, you can always politely decline, as I do.
Some say the squeaky wheel gets the oil. But often it gets kicked a few times first.
Remember back in the 80's and 90's when Radio Shack used to ask everyone for name & address info with every cash purchase? Inevitably followed by junk mail. Back then we weren't so circumspect about giving this info away. After all, with a name, it only took a telephone book to find out address and phone number. That sort of information was (and still is) a matter of public record.
Does it actually work like that? Can one make a random accusation of data misuse without any evidence, and then require the defendant to prove, via a discovery process, that they did not misuse the data?
They already suppose tohave enough proof to make the claim. It depends whether the judge agrees they met the minimum burden to order discovery on that claim. He may or may not.
Agreed, but given what Apple would need to have done - either sell the zipcode data or use it to track down the customers' addresses by some other means, and then send advertising material to those addresses - actual evidence seems unlikely. I suspect that they are banking on the superficial similarity of the claim to a previously successful claim that did involve that full behavior to enable a fishing expedition. Still hard to see that passing muster.
Brilliant. Yelling, at a minimum wage kid trying to do the job the boss told him/her to do. The kid didn't make the policy, but the kid gets fired if s/he doesn't do as instructed.
Ya know, you can always politely decline, as I do.
Some say the squeaky wheel gets the oil. But often it gets kicked a few times first.
Remember back in the 80's and 90's when Radio Shack used to ask everyone for name & address info with every cash purchase? Inevitably followed by junk mail. Back then we weren't so circumspect about giving this info away. After all, with a name, it only took a telephone book to find out address and phone number. That sort of information was (and still is) a matter of public record.
Yelling isn't always called for, but it does have the effect of bringing a terrible store policy to the attention of everyone within earshot (including the store manager, who rushed over). Incidentally, the anger and outrage was completely spontaneous.
I'm not aware of any instances where either Apple or Google sold information to a third party. I doubt you know of one even concerning Google but if you do please share it.
Amazon I've no idea about but I suspect they may.
Anyway, that's not the point. If the case is allowed to go forward with that claim in place I don't think Apple will be eager to have attorneys filing discovery requests on how Apple specifically shares information collected on it's users. It won't really matter if it's actually sold. Once those discovery orders are complied with the details will somehow"leak" to the media who's nearly guaranteed to find some juicy privacy angle for eyeballs. Before things get to that point I'm personally convinced Apple would find a way to settle it.
If I Google a product, and I turn Little Snitch off, within minutes I get sales material via email from companies selling those products, I also suddenly get ads appearing on web sites for those same products if I turn Ad Blocker off. Are you telling me Google doesn't; a) pass on my search, b) get compensated if I buy something? Really?
While I haven't been in MA lately, whenever retailers ask me for my ZIP code, I simply tell them, "you don't need it." No one has ever insisted that I give it to them.
However, when using a credit card in a terminal (such as a gas pump), if it recognizes that I'm far from home, it does usually ask me for my ZIP.
Apple is so secretive, I have a really hard time believing that even if they collected this info that they would sell it to anybody. I'm sure that they just use it internally, perhaps so that if they get a lot of customers from a single ZIP code that's not the ZIP code the store is in, they might use that assist in new store location decisions.
This lawsuit is a waste of time. At best, they'll get Apple to stop asking for ZIP codes in MA. If there's any money, the lawyers will take almost all of it.
If I Google a product, and I turn Little Snitch off, within minutes I get sales material via email from companies selling those products, I also suddenly get ads appearing on web sites for those same products if I turn Ad Blocker off. Are you telling me Google doesn't; a) pass on my search, b) get compensated if I buy something? Really?
I'm not telling you anything other than Google places ads for companies based on your interests and I'm not aware of any instances of Google selling information on users to them instead. You're the one claiming they definitely do yet still haven't offered proof of it. I don't expect you ever to do so either, but maybe I'll be surprised.
As far as doing a search and within minutes getting emails on just that subject it's never happened to me but perhaps you have a bigger target on your back. and get more personal attention. If it happened here at AI any of these other not-Google companies might be the culprit as they and other of their brethren are all following you as you probably know. Easier to just lump all online and email ads under "Google did it" I know, but some like to see the details anyway.
AppNexus
Atlas
Beanstock Media
Criteo
Facebook Connect
Facebook Exchange (FBX)
Media Innovation Group
Media Optimizer (Adobe)
New Relic
OpenX
Quantcast
Right Media
Rocket Fuel
Rubicon
ScoreCard Research Beacon
VigLink
EDIT: Rechecking just now there were 36 trackers in use here. Geesh.
If those aren't enough there's another 1500+ not-Google trackers that just Ghostery knows about. Google may be the one everyone talks about, but they're far from the only ad placement company and have nothing to do with data brokering AFAIK unlike many of them.
Whenever I use my CC to purchase gasoline, I am asked for my zip. This is virtually SOP (standard operating procedure) these days.
Ambulance chasing lawyers will drive us all to the poor house.
Bingo. I was reading to see if anyone else would make this point. Apparently, these three guys in Massachusetts don't drive.
You didn't read far enough then. In cases where the CC processors require zip codes for authentication (such as unattended gas purchases) then this law does not apply.
Comments
I thought the standard reply would be 90210. Being from a country that does not use zip codes this is the zip code that "works".
I doubt there will be any 'settling'. I simply don't believe any of this this in the first place. This is Apple not Google or Amazon we are discussing here. Since when did Apple ever 'sell' user information to a third party that you know of? By the way, it's worth mentioning to those folks in MA, I don't know about them, but I can't buy gas at a gas station with my Amex card without putting in my zip code these days.
What you did and Apple did are different. With a zip code, Apple is not obtaining your address. It is merely verifying that you know a piece of information that the card holder gave to his or her credit card company. Apple can't use that information to send you stuff in the mail. It, however, collects your address voluntarily after a sale if you register a product. I have never received mail from third parties that was likely tied to an Apple purchase. This is no different than what happens at many gas pumps.
You on the other hand asked for highly personal information. I would never give a vendor my address or phone number as a condition of sale. Often times merchants ask for my phone number, and I always decline to provide it. Regardless of what your intent might be, I simply do not think a merchant is entitled to that information. In my case, you would have lost a sale. You should also check with Visa, MasterCard, discover, or American Express. Asking for that information might violate the card companies terms and conditions. For example, many people don't know a merchant who accepts visa cannot require at least five dollars be spent to use the card.
I'm not aware of any instances where either Apple or Google sold information to a third party. I doubt you know of one even concerning Google but if you do please share it.
Amazon I've no idea about but I suspect they may.
Anyway, that's not the point. If the case is allowed to go forward with that claim in place I don't think Apple will be eager to have attorneys filing discovery requests on how Apple specifically shares information collected on it's users. It won't really matter if it's actually sold. Once those discovery orders are complied with the details will somehow"leak" to the media who's nearly guaranteed to find some juicy privacy angle for eyeballs. Before things get to that point I'm personally convinced Apple would find a way to settle it.
I doubt there will be any 'settling'. I simply don't believe any of this this in the first place. This is Apple not Google or Amazon we are discussing here. Since when did Apple ever 'sell' user information to a third party that you know of? By the way, it's worth mentioning to those folks in MA, I don't know about them, but I can't buy gas at a gas station with my Amex card without putting in my zip code these days.
I'm not aware of any instances where either Apple or Google sold information to a third party. I doubt you know of one even concerning Google but if you do please share it.
Amazon I've no idea about but I suspect they may.
Anyway, that's not the point. If the case is allowed to go forward with that claim in place I don't think Apple will be eager to have attorneys filing discovery requests on how Apple specifically shares information collected on it's users. It won't really matter if it's actually sold. Once those discovery orders are complied with the details will somehow"leak" to the media who's nearly guaranteed to find some juicy privacy angle for eyeballs. Before things get to that point I'm personally convinced Apple would find a way to settle it.
Does it actually work like that? Can one make a random accusation of data misuse without any evidence, and then require the defendant to prove, via a discovery process, that they did not misuse the data?
I've been asked my zip code and phone number at Best Buy before when I used cash, but I loudly yelled at the cashier that I was not under any obligation to provide any personal information for a cash purchase. They quit asking.
That's what lawyers call a fishing expedition. You must be able to cite a specific incident or documentation. You cannot simply say, "turn over everything you have".
They already suppose tohave enough proof to make the claim. It depends whether the judge agrees they met the minimum burden to order discovery on that claim. He may or may not.
I've been asked my zip code and phone number at Best Buy before when I used cash, but I loudly yelled at the cashier that I was not under any obligation to provide any personal information for a cash purchase. They quit asking.
Brilliant. Yelling, at a minimum wage kid trying to do the job the boss told him/her to do. The kid didn't make the policy, but the kid gets fired if s/he doesn't do as instructed.
Ya know, you can always politely decline, as I do.
Some say the squeaky wheel gets the oil. But often it gets kicked a few times first.
Remember back in the 80's and 90's when Radio Shack used to ask everyone for name & address info with every cash purchase? Inevitably followed by junk mail. Back then we weren't so circumspect about giving this info away. After all, with a name, it only took a telephone book to find out address and phone number. That sort of information was (and still is) a matter of public record.
Does it actually work like that? Can one make a random accusation of data misuse without any evidence, and then require the defendant to prove, via a discovery process, that they did not misuse the data?
They already suppose tohave enough proof to make the claim. It depends whether the judge agrees they met the minimum burden to order discovery on that claim. He may or may not.
Agreed, but given what Apple would need to have done - either sell the zipcode data or use it to track down the customers' addresses by some other means, and then send advertising material to those addresses - actual evidence seems unlikely. I suspect that they are banking on the superficial similarity of the claim to a previously successful claim that did involve that full behavior to enable a fishing expedition. Still hard to see that passing muster.
Yelling isn't always called for, but it does have the effect of bringing a terrible store policy to the attention of everyone within earshot (including the store manager, who rushed over). Incidentally, the anger and outrage was completely spontaneous.
If I Google a product, and I turn Little Snitch off, within minutes I get sales material via email from companies selling those products, I also suddenly get ads appearing on web sites for those same products if I turn Ad Blocker off. Are you telling me Google doesn't; a) pass on my search, b) get compensated if I buy something? Really?
However, when using a credit card in a terminal (such as a gas pump), if it recognizes that I'm far from home, it does usually ask me for my ZIP.
Apple is so secretive, I have a really hard time believing that even if they collected this info that they would sell it to anybody. I'm sure that they just use it internally, perhaps so that if they get a lot of customers from a single ZIP code that's not the ZIP code the store is in, they might use that assist in new store location decisions.
This lawsuit is a waste of time. At best, they'll get Apple to stop asking for ZIP codes in MA. If there's any money, the lawyers will take almost all of it.
I'm not telling you anything other than Google places ads for companies based on your interests and I'm not aware of any instances of Google selling information on users to them instead. You're the one claiming they definitely do yet still haven't offered proof of it. I don't expect you ever to do so either, but maybe I'll be surprised.
As far as doing a search and within minutes getting emails on just that subject it's never happened to me but perhaps you have a bigger target on your back. and get more personal attention. If it happened here at AI any of these other not-Google companies might be the culprit as they and other of their brethren are all following you as you probably know. Easier to just lump all online and email ads under "Google did it" I know, but some like to see the details anyway.
AppNexus
Atlas
Beanstock Media
Criteo
Facebook Connect
Facebook Exchange (FBX)
Media Innovation Group
Media Optimizer (Adobe)
New Relic
OpenX
Quantcast
Right Media
Rocket Fuel
Rubicon
ScoreCard Research Beacon
VigLink
EDIT: Rechecking just now there were 36 trackers in use here. Geesh.
If those aren't enough there's another 1500+ not-Google trackers that just Ghostery knows about. Google may be the one everyone talks about, but they're far from the only ad placement company and have nothing to do with data brokering AFAIK unlike many of them.
If they wanted to send advertisements through mail, all they have to do is go here:
https://www.usps.com/business/send-mail-for-business.htm?
Whenever I use my CC to purchase gasoline, I am asked for my zip. This is virtually SOP (standard operating procedure) these days.
Ambulance chasing lawyers will drive us all to the poor house.
Bingo. I was reading to see if anyone else would make this point. Apparently, these three guys in Massachusetts don't drive.
Whenever I use my CC to purchase gasoline, I am asked for my zip. This is virtually SOP (standard operating procedure) these days.
Ambulance chasing lawyers will drive us all to the poor house.
Bingo. I was reading to see if anyone else would make this point. Apparently, these three guys in Massachusetts don't drive.
You didn't read far enough then. In cases where the CC processors require zip codes for authentication (such as unattended gas purchases) then this law does not apply.
That's your job, isn't it?