If the apps are popping the 'This Application Wants To Access Your Location' when not doing any location related stuff beyond ads, I think they're violating current Apple policy, in which case I'm not sure how that makes Apple an accomplice, but hey, it's a lawsuit, not logic.
As I recall, the rule is the question must pop up when an app wants to use your location. Period. How it uses that info is moot.
Also,Apple has apparently kicked out several apps that were found to be calling home with the device id, as that is a no no. But only within apple policy. There are no concrete laws in this area. in the end, because Apple is acting to remove the apps as soon as the issue is discovered, they may be deemed in the clear as a form of safe haven, not unlike ISPs being cleared if they act when copyright violations are reported to them
If these allegations are true, the suit is well-founded.
And I agree the user, not Apple, should have control over when UDIDs are sent, and when they are not.
Then they have to sue every Phone service supplier in the world. And the UDID is there by federal law to help locate certain device in case is needed (911/police)
when I used to work for t-mobile we used the SIM Card # and the UDID # to fix and provide service to the customer and of course to have location of the cellphone on the network.
But under the terms of use for reps and users that specific ID wasn't considered private like a social security # or address, etc.
They are assuming Apple use the UDID like a phone company and that is not necessary true. Apple have different ways to ID a phone like the serial number, itunes account that the device is linked to, and even the mac address.
They have to prove that Apple shares private info with third parties and that wont happen. Plain and simple.
I hear no one suing Sony cause the PS3 glitch yet.... and that incident left private and sensitive information in hands of people that has the means to harm economically and personally the users since it can be used to rip money from credit cards or get spending habits of a user and then rob them at home or work.
Then this DB file is not visible, is not accessible to no one unless you get inside the OS and thats a feat a common user will not pull without some advance knowledge making it unlikely to happen. All this privacy stuff is bull..
"If you access the Service from a mobile or other device, we may collect a unique device identifier assigned to that device or other transactional information for that device."
But they say they use it like this:
"We use the information that we collect and you provide about yourself to personalize your PANDORA® internet radio experience through ads and social networking features."
They may collect UDID according to their own privacy policies But do not states how they do it, if directly with their own means. This practice is long used by anyone that developed software since is their way to identify certain device/platform and recognize their software build so they can prompt the user for updates, etc.
Then they have to sue every Phone service supplier in the world. And the UDID is there by federal law to help locate certain device in case is needed (911/police)
when I used to work for t-mobile we used the SIM Card # and the UDID # to fix and provide service to the customer and of course to have location of the cellphone on the network.
Being able to determine a phone's location is a completely separate issue from being able to identify an individual's data in the pool of data that is collected and shared. Apple's policy is that they do not collect or share any information that can be used to identify the individual. In fact, Bud Tribble just today testified to Congress that this is Apple's policy.
The suit claims they do collect and share this information. If this is true, Apple's policy is not telling consumers the truth. It would be what's known as a "deceptive practice", which can be prosecuted under existing law.
What other companies are doing with device identifiers, I honestly don't know. But it would offer Apple no protection from not following their own publicly stated policies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by plokoonpma
They have to prove that Apple shares private info with third parties and that wont happen. Plain and simple.
You may be right about that, but that will be determined by the courts, not posts on message boards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by plokoonpma
I hear no one suing Sony cause the PS3 glitch yet.... and that incident left private and sensitive information in hands of people that has the means to harm economically and personally the users since it can be used to rip money from credit cards or get spending habits of a user and then rob them at home or work.
I think that's a very good point. No one's suing them because there are no laws under which they can be sued. Part of the purpose of the Congressional hearings is to determine if such laws should be created.
"If you access the Service from a mobile or other device, we may collect a unique device identifier assigned to that device or other transactional information for that device."
But they say they use it like this:
"We use the information that we collect and you provide about yourself to personalize your PANDORA® internet radio experience through ads and social networking features."
They may collect UDID according to their own privacy policies But do not states how they do it, if directly with their own means. This practice is long used by anyone that developed software since is their way to identify certain device/platform and recognize their software build so they can prompt the user for updates, etc.
All fair enough as far as it goes. The problem is, it doesn't go very far in explaining exactly how the data is used.
For example, does Pandora share UDID data along with other data that would allow 3rd parties, such as PleaseRobMe.com (http://pleaserobme.com/ ) to identify you and track your location? Their policy is silent on this.
This intentional vagueness of company policy is another issue being looked at by the Congressional hearings.
The suit claims they do collect and share this information. If this is true, Apple's policy is not telling consumers the truth. It would be what's known as a "deceptive practice", which can be prosecuted under existing law.
Just as a P.S. to this... I'm watching the testimony being given to Congress on this issue. A fellow named Ashkan Soltani has just testified that:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Congressional Hearing
"This data contains identifiers, IP addresses. We heard earlier from the gentleman from the Department Of Justice. He was claiming that IP addresses are necessary to identify criminals. To the degree that these IP addresses are used to identify criminals, they become identifiable and it's difficult to call this data anonymous. Making those claims I think is not really sincere".
Based on that testimony, it seems the case being discussed on this thread is very well founded and there is grounds to prosecute Apple under "deceptive practices" laws.
Sounds like these issues should be decided AFTER the details emerge, rather than before
If this case clarifies some important issues, that might not be all bad at all. If it turns out to make Apple tighten up some policies and reign in unscrupulous (or careless) developers, even better. Or if it turns out that no improvement is even needed, and the current situation already protects us adequately, at least we’ll know that instead of assuming.
Screw the lawyers who filed the suit. Only they will benefit. The rest of us stand to lose, for instance, the best FREE Internet music service on the planet. Shame on all of you for hurting innocent bystanders to line the pockets of your clients and yourself with the dreams lost by the users.
Comments
If the apps are popping the 'This Application Wants To Access Your Location' when not doing any location related stuff beyond ads, I think they're violating current Apple policy, in which case I'm not sure how that makes Apple an accomplice, but hey, it's a lawsuit, not logic.
As I recall, the rule is the question must pop up when an app wants to use your location. Period. How it uses that info is moot.
Also,Apple has apparently kicked out several apps that were found to be calling home with the device id, as that is a no no. But only within apple policy. There are no concrete laws in this area. in the end, because Apple is acting to remove the apps as soon as the issue is discovered, they may be deemed in the clear as a form of safe haven, not unlike ISPs being cleared if they act when copyright violations are reported to them
If these allegations are true, the suit is well-founded.
And I agree the user, not Apple, should have control over when UDIDs are sent, and when they are not.
Then they have to sue every Phone service supplier in the world. And the UDID is there by federal law to help locate certain device in case is needed (911/police)
when I used to work for t-mobile we used the SIM Card # and the UDID # to fix and provide service to the customer and of course to have location of the cellphone on the network.
But under the terms of use for reps and users that specific ID wasn't considered private like a social security # or address, etc.
They are assuming Apple use the UDID like a phone company and that is not necessary true. Apple have different ways to ID a phone like the serial number, itunes account that the device is linked to, and even the mac address.
They have to prove that Apple shares private info with third parties and that wont happen. Plain and simple.
I hear no one suing Sony cause the PS3 glitch yet.... and that incident left private and sensitive information in hands of people that has the means to harm economically and personally the users since it can be used to rip money from credit cards or get spending habits of a user and then rob them at home or work.
Then this DB file is not visible, is not accessible to no one unless you get inside the OS and thats a feat a common user will not pull without some advance knowledge making it unlikely to happen. All this privacy stuff is bull..
See Pandora's Privacy Policies:
http://www.pandora.com/privacy/
"If you access the Service from a mobile or other device, we may collect a unique device identifier assigned to that device or other transactional information for that device."
But they say they use it like this:
"We use the information that we collect and you provide about yourself to personalize your PANDORA® internet radio experience through ads and social networking features."
They may collect UDID according to their own privacy policies But do not states how they do it, if directly with their own means. This practice is long used by anyone that developed software since is their way to identify certain device/platform and recognize their software build so they can prompt the user for updates, etc.
Whores.
A job for every attorney!
Then they have to sue every Phone service supplier in the world. And the UDID is there by federal law to help locate certain device in case is needed (911/police)
when I used to work for t-mobile we used the SIM Card # and the UDID # to fix and provide service to the customer and of course to have location of the cellphone on the network.
Being able to determine a phone's location is a completely separate issue from being able to identify an individual's data in the pool of data that is collected and shared. Apple's policy is that they do not collect or share any information that can be used to identify the individual. In fact, Bud Tribble just today testified to Congress that this is Apple's policy.
The suit claims they do collect and share this information. If this is true, Apple's policy is not telling consumers the truth. It would be what's known as a "deceptive practice", which can be prosecuted under existing law.
What other companies are doing with device identifiers, I honestly don't know. But it would offer Apple no protection from not following their own publicly stated policies.
They have to prove that Apple shares private info with third parties and that wont happen. Plain and simple.
You may be right about that, but that will be determined by the courts, not posts on message boards.
I hear no one suing Sony cause the PS3 glitch yet.... and that incident left private and sensitive information in hands of people that has the means to harm economically and personally the users since it can be used to rip money from credit cards or get spending habits of a user and then rob them at home or work.
I think that's a very good point. No one's suing them because there are no laws under which they can be sued. Part of the purpose of the Congressional hearings is to determine if such laws should be created.
See Pandora's Privacy Policies:
http://www.pandora.com/privacy/
"If you access the Service from a mobile or other device, we may collect a unique device identifier assigned to that device or other transactional information for that device."
But they say they use it like this:
"We use the information that we collect and you provide about yourself to personalize your PANDORA® internet radio experience through ads and social networking features."
They may collect UDID according to their own privacy policies But do not states how they do it, if directly with their own means. This practice is long used by anyone that developed software since is their way to identify certain device/platform and recognize their software build so they can prompt the user for updates, etc.
All fair enough as far as it goes. The problem is, it doesn't go very far in explaining exactly how the data is used.
For example, does Pandora share UDID data along with other data that would allow 3rd parties, such as PleaseRobMe.com (http://pleaserobme.com/ ) to identify you and track your location? Their policy is silent on this.
This intentional vagueness of company policy is another issue being looked at by the Congressional hearings.
The suit claims they do collect and share this information. If this is true, Apple's policy is not telling consumers the truth. It would be what's known as a "deceptive practice", which can be prosecuted under existing law.
Just as a P.S. to this... I'm watching the testimony being given to Congress on this issue. A fellow named Ashkan Soltani has just testified that:
"This data contains identifiers, IP addresses. We heard earlier from the gentleman from the Department Of Justice. He was claiming that IP addresses are necessary to identify criminals. To the degree that these IP addresses are used to identify criminals, they become identifiable and it's difficult to call this data anonymous. Making those claims I think is not really sincere".
Based on that testimony, it seems the case being discussed on this thread is very well founded and there is grounds to prosecute Apple under "deceptive practices" laws.
If this case clarifies some important issues, that might not be all bad at all. If it turns out to make Apple tighten up some policies and reign in unscrupulous (or careless) developers, even better. Or if it turns out that no improvement is even needed, and the current situation already protects us adequately, at least we’ll know that instead of assuming.