|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 | |
|
Path Reaches Settlement with FTC Over Address Book Privacy Concerns
![]() ![]() The scandal resulted in Apple locking down user data in iOS 6, requiring explicit permission before apps could access a users location, contacts, calendars, photos, and reminders. Today, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission announced that it has reached a settlement with Path. The agreement requires Path to establish a new privacy program, obtain independent privacy assessments for 20 years, and pay an $800,000 fine. Quote:
Path has posted a response to the settlement on its blog. Article Link: Path Reaches Settlement with FTC Over Address Book Privacy Concerns |
||
|
|
0
|
|
|
#2 |
|
__________________
jamiebrightmore.com |
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Very nice result. Now what we would like to know whether that idiot in their marketing department who thought stealing people's complete address book was a good idea got fired.
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Didn't research the size of this company, but $800k is a ton of cash.
__________________
iMac 27" 3.06Ghz 2TB Time Capsule AppleTV3 x 2 16GB iPhone 5 White/Silver AT&T iPod Touch 4th Gen White and 5th Gen Yellow iPad mini White/Silver 16GB WiFi
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Wait, so instead of making Path delete it's database of user address books, the Feds just took $800k for themselves? Am I missing something?
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Independent privacy assessments for 20 years and an $800k fine. Good thing we have the Government to protect us from ourselves!
__________________
Obama is a true statesman whose experience as a state senator, half-term US Senator & guest lecturer in a Constitutional Law class has fully prepared him to take control of our nuclear arsenal.-Me |
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
#7 |
|
|
1
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Who gets the $800k?
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
This punishment is excessive, $800,000? I can think of some crimes far worse that our government has given less for....
I think it was a dumb thing to do but this will probably kill the company. Quote:
Yeah |
||
|
|
3
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Quote:
Have you heard of the phrase "Don't steal, the government hates competition"? Governments view the mafia as their competition in areas such as extortion, racketeering and outright theft. When the government does it, it is legal.
__________________
15" Retina MBP, 2.7 Ghz Quad Core i7, 16 GB RAM, 768 GB SSD 24" iMac, 2.8 GHz, 4GB RAM, 320 GB HD; 64 GB iPad 4G LTE; 64 GB iPhone 4 S⃣ |
||
|
|
6
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Quote:
If my boss told me to write code that uploads a user's address book to our servers, I would politely ask him to contact our legal department. If he refused or said the legal department is Ok with this, I would ask him to give me the order to write this code in writing and signed, and the written response from legal as well. And in my company, it would be _him_ losing his job over this, not me. Do thieves stay out of jail if the police recovers the money that was stolen? Path can consider itself well-protected from itself. |
||
|
|
7
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Interesting that the companies response does not say anything about the misuse of user data, but only that a computer issue let underage users sign up. Apparently, they still don't get it. Maybe a larger fine or a class action lawsuit is in order to make them see the error of their ways.
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Where does the cash go? To the users affected?
__________________
iPhone 5 64GB on 4GEE iPad 3G+WiFi 64GB 13" MacBook Air (2.13GHz, 4GB, 256GB) - 15" MacBook Pro (2.4GHz, 4GB) Mac Mini (2.6GHz quad i7, 16GB, 256GB SSD) |
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
#14 |
|
It would be nice if all the users, whose data were part of the breach, got some kind of settlement.
__________________
Mid-2010 13" MBP/128GB Crucial M4 SSD/250GB Stock HDD/8GB RAM/Dual Boot: OS X 10.8.2 & Windows 7 Professional iPhone 5 32GB Black iPad 2 32GB WiFi Black |
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
#15 |
|
People were hoping to profit somehow from all of that contact info.
I think the fine is meant to show Path and other Mobile developers that you have to pay a heavy fine for helping yourself to this data without asking permission and havinga EULA.
__________________
Smiley Blast! game play video http://youtu.be/N0QD4KS5Ccw Like this:http://facebook.com/smileyBlastGame Follow: http://twitter.com/smiley_blast Buy This: http://appstore.com/smileyblast |
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
#16 | ||
|
Quote:
Quote:
You sound like Nancy Grace spouting off on something with no facts or knowledge of the situation.
|
|||
|
|
0
|
|
|
#17 |
|
The $.8m fine was for allowing children under 13 to sign up. It was collateral damage to the investigation.
__________________
Early 2011 MacBook Pro 17", 2.3GHz i7 (8MB L3), 8GB, 1.25TB Fusion Drive Mac Plus, Mac Classic II, PowerMac G5, and more iPhone 5, iPhone 4 CDMA, iPhone 3GS |
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
#18 | |
|
Quote:
|
||
|
|
0
|
|
|
#19 |
|
I'm really disappointed by the quality of the reporting here.
The $800K fine was for allowing 12 year olds the create accounts (a bug which was fixed long before the FTC got involved), but the entire post makes it sound like it's all about addressbook gate. The FTC conducted an investigation because of the address book scandal, but the $800K had nothing to do with that.
__________________
BugHub: GitHub issues for you iPad |
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
#20 |
|
[QUOTE=macsrcool1234;16767844]I develop software for a living too. This is a bit unrelated but If I had an employee tell me something like that, I'd fire them on the spot. It's not your job to play lawyer..."
And they'd be lucky to be fired before you dragged them into your web. In your kind of thinking, whistle blowers should be fired before they get in the way of your goals. Path is NOT naive if you study their background and level of expertise. It is possible that your approach might be naive rather than malicious. |
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Path's response is embarrassing
Their response is a total straw man about the children under the age of 13. It doesn't ONCE mention automatically uploading mycontacts to their servers.
EDIT: Apparently, it's Macrumors that should embarrassed, this entire story makes it sound like the problem was the contacts, when in actuality, the FTC fined them only because of underage accounts. |
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
#22 | ||
|
Quote:
---------- Quote:
|
|||
|
|
0
|
|
|
#23 |
|
That's entirely unsupported speculation. You don't even know that at the time 12 year olds were allowed to sign up, addressbooks were being uploaded. Path 1.0 and 2.0 are vastly different products.
__________________
BugHub: GitHub issues for you iPad |
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
#24 | ||
|
Quote:
Quote:
How about enlightening us, Nancy Grace? |
|||
|
|
0
|
|
|
#25 | |
|
Quote:
I think you mean: "Do thieves stay out of jail if they return the money that was stolen?" |
||
|
|
0
|
![]() |
|
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:06 AM.









iMac 27" 3.06Ghz
Linear Mode
