50% of iPad Magazine Subscribers Allow Apple to Pass Info to Publishers

[kingtj]

re: Why give them this info?

Well ... for starters, maybe you're actually interested enough in the topic the magazine covers that you're not opposed to them passing your info along to other *related* companies? This isn't "carte blanche" permission to resell your personal info to all takers. It's more like, if you subscribe to a photography magazine, they could pass your info along to their advertisers so they could mail you advertising about new camera-related products they're offering. That might be just the type of targeted advertising you don't mind receiving?

Additionally, it's clear that this was the "make or break" deal that allowed publishers to go digital on the iPad -- so in that sense, it seems to be a good thing that half the people DID opt in for sharing their info in this manner. If nobody was willing to let them share their contact info, then they seem to feel it makes them unable to generate enough profit to be worth pursing providing the material in this format at all.

Why would anyone give them this info - you are just lining the pubs pockets when they sell your info to others.

 

[steadysignal]

always say no.

 

[SkyStudios]

Not correct. Apple was building a database of cell and WiFi locations, with anonymized user data in the aggregate being collected.

Not a big deal.

Well it certainly sounded good in court but according to the evidence presented by the wall street journal Senator Al Franken was tough but gave apple a month to stop the practice of taking more then just locations data and also users personal info, all while warning them that we all DO NOT WANT TO SHUT YOU DOWN, he instead said lets have a balance,

Sounds fair to me if someone got busted the first time and warned in court, other countries hang you, if people knew what the WSJ had i am positive they would sue for their money back., Apple is not just some Social Networking site where you have a choice to share info or not, we are talking about hardware products sold to customers with the intent to collect all their info with out their knowledge.

 

[SkyStudios]

always say no.

the problem is it did not matter id the users said no, trust is now out the window, they still took it and called it a bug

read my post above

 

[b0blndsy]

So you say "Don't allow", but does that mean they really don't get the info?

Privacy is never secure in this world. At most of the times companies will have the information stores somewhere and real thing to worry is wheather they use it without consent of the consumer or not.

 

[teloche]

Privacy is never secure in this world. At most of the times companies will have the information stores somewhere and real thing to worry is wheather they use it without consent of the consumer or not.

thats why so any people who work for Law enforcement agencies, law, politicians, music artists, artists in general, advertising companies, woman stalked in general welcome Congress and Sen. Franken SLAPPING apple in the face Tuesday,

i agree its not only Apple doing this but they did most of the dirty work believe it or not, i guess we will never know what the Wall Street Journal's evidence against Apple is but until next month (that is if apple tries to argue their way out of doing it still), but basically Google got off becuase their behavior was minor compared to Apple.

If you think about it, there is not possible mistake that Apple did this deliberately, no bug no accident, they have National Security Analysts working in Apples Cyber security department.

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/blogs/pre...-Ahead-of-iPhone-5-Development-114492024.html

 

[megsandbytes]

I'd probably be a little hesitant before saying "Yes" in this case