Apple and App Developers Sued Over Sharing User Information With Advertisers

[Popeye206]

damn, let apple learn a lesson, personal information should be kept private and you can not use it for making money.

Sorry to say, this is the way advertising and marketing has been working for years. You don't think you asked for all that junk mail did you? Also, you do know that list selling and renting is big business for many industries.

We know nothing of the details and it even says in the Article that Apple prohibits the distribution of customer data without permission. In fact, on iTunes, Apple is being slammed by publishers for not sharing data. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

So I'm guessing this is nothing but lawyers looking to stir the pot in hopes of getting a big settlement check in the end.

 

[arn]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

It's not an Apple does no wrong thing. It's that this particular issue isn't really an Apple issue.

An issue that people claimed Apple wouldn't participate in with iAd. I remember all the claims that "Android is about stealing your info to sell to advertisers!" and "Apple will never stoop that low, they are protecting you with iAd!". All the attacks on Google about privacy and Apple being different...

Seriously, anyone who actually believed that Apple wouldn't do this was delusional. Thanks for the first spin post though. "We weren't wrong, we never claimed Apple would never do this!".

Well I never said it. Got a link to someone saying it? Very well may be. Just curious since I am suspect of your recollection of it.

Also, we've known that Apple collects data and allows opt out for some time (before iAds even launched):
https://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/2...store-terms-to-allow-opt-out-of-iad-tracking/

So I think it's as bit strange to point to this and say "see, look at what apple's doing" when it was detailed back in June. I think your biases are stronger here than anyone's.

 

[blahblah100]

Oh noes, the UUID! I feel so insecure now!
If anything sue AOL and Google. They always take information. And Apple doesn't even make the apps, so why are THEY getting sued? Not to mention we don't even know yet if the UUIDs ARE getting stolen.

Trolls

Can you post the UDID from all of your iOS devices, please?

As a matter of fact, everybody who says the UDID means nothing, post yours to prove your point. If you feel they are not at risk, then you should have no problem publicly posting yours, correct?

 

[Arguru]

Who made the apps?

Youtube has plenty of pirated videos that are stored and distributed by Youtube. It's not Google's problem.

Apple earns money with the apps, and is responsible for what the apps do...
And if you claim that the copyrights of that video are owned by you, the video will be deleted. Thats why there's a lot of videos without sound.

I'm not saying that this is a good thing, actually i think it's pretty stupid, but i think that apple is as guilty as the app developers.

 

[Don Kosak]

Using the device ID to properly rotate through ads seems perfectly fair. Otherwise advertisers would have no reliable way of knowing which ads have been presented to a device already.

I think these guys cross the line when they send any other data, especially personal data someone entered into an App. If an App is going to do that, it needs to be upfront and display a message like: "This App is supported via advertising. It will share your {age, income, gender, cat's name, mother's shoe size} with advertisers in return for providing this service."

If you disagree, the App can always go into a "reduced functionality" mode.

On the other hand, most internet websites you visit, probably already ~do~ share all of that data with advertisers without you knowing about it... Think about that.

 

[BaldiMac]

An issue that people claimed Apple wouldn't participate in with iAd. I remember all the claims that "Android is about stealing your info to sell to advertisers!" and "Apple will never stoop that low, they are protecting you with iAd!". All the attacks on Google about privacy and Apple being different...

Seriously, anyone who actually believed that Apple wouldn't do this was delusional. Thanks for the first spin post though. "We weren't wrong, we never claimed Apple would never do this!".

You are missing Arn's point. Apple isn't "doing" anything here. This complaint is not about iAd. It's about 3rd parties taking advantage of the UDID.

 

[KnightWRX]

Well I never said it. Got a link to someone saying it? Very well may be. Just curious since I am suspect of your recollection of it.

Let's make it easier on everybody. Just post up a story about an Android app leaking your info. You'll get tons there. Or you could go through the old Admob stories when Apple changed their policies on 3rd party data collection. I don't keep around links to people's comment, nor do I have to inclination to go find those threads and find the comments.

 

[Small White Car]

Who made the apps?

Youtube has plenty of pirated videos that are stored and distributed by Youtube. It's not Google's problem.

Actually, it is Google's problem. It's why they allow companies to take down videos. The courts were close to saying that Youtube would have to pay damages to those companies until they came up with that compromise.

You are missing Arn's point. Apple isn't "doing" anything here. This complaint is not about iAd. It's about 3rd parties taking advantage of the UDID.

What Apple did was claim that no info would be transmitted without your knowledge. Then, when it turns out that that's not 100% true, they have to fall back on "oh, well sure, SOME info gets sent, but it's anonymous."

I don't have an issue with what Apple has allowed, but I do think they have not been honest enough about it in their descriptions. As I see it, that's what the lawsuit is really about. Not what they did, but how they explained it.

 

[pubwvj]

Real issue: Greedy, filthy, money grubbing lawyers.

 

[shartypants]

Apple is the fence here, users on one side and advertisers on the other, tough position to be in, but I think ultimately users should take preference. I really don't think anyone wants their lifestyle patterns monitored (even if it is just to customize the advertising presented to them), Apple should do what they can to address this.

 

[arn]

I don't keep around links to people's comment, nor do I have to inclination to go find those threads and find the comments.

See the rest of my post, which I added to. I'll simply reiterate, you are remembering inaccurately.

arn

 

[jav6454]

It's a good thing Apple got sued. The bad thing, the lawyers get a huge chunk. Other than that, I hope developers, and Apple for allowing this, are nailed. If I say no, it means no.

 

[arn]

I'll point out there there are two issues here.

1. Apple provides a UDID which is a unique device identifier, which is anonymous by itself. Developers can access this and it's used frequently to track very useful stuff. Since it gives each install something uniquely identifiable
2. Some ad networks and or apps are collecting data and transmitting this alongside the UDID. So if you sign up for some service which asks for your age, it might send your age, gender etc... to an ad network alongside your UDID. This is to target ads more effectively.

arn

 

[wirelessmacuser]

Everyone does it, why does everyone just assume it's only Google that does it.

Everyone seems to have this evil image of Google.

Great post, 100% true.

The reason that Apple users hate Google, believing they're evil is twofold.

Having been brainwashed by uncle Steve, they lack the desire to think for themselves & realize the Google business model has not changed since day one. They rely on adverstising income.

Second is the fact that Steve Jobs is striken with extreme paranoia, and supreme jealousy of Google. So he's declared war, using his minions of fanboys to spread the Apple hate mongering gospel of the church of Apple. The poor souls simply don't realize their being used & abused via Apple Tax.

 

[nagromme]

Even non-identifiable info (UDID), if it’s unique to you, needs to be opt-in and protected. Because if and when it gets tied to identifiable info, by even one company, your privacy protection is gone. So I’m glad this is being pursued, and Apple does need to set strict rules and kick offenders out.

 

[huss8585]

Itunes connect is open.

Itunes connect was just opened!!! Check your sales!!

 

[kas23]

It's not an Apple does no wrong thing. It's that this particular issue isn't really an Apple issue.

This is simply not true. Apple not only sanctions every individual app in its App Store, it provides bandwidth for distribution, it facilitates a well-oiled user-friendly distribution method, and even makes money off each app sold. And remember, one of Apple arguments for the approval process is to protect the end-user.

Who made the apps?

Youtube has plenty of pirated videos that are stored and distributed by Youtube. It's not Google's problem.

Flawed argument. Google makes every effort to quickly remove copyrighted maerial if they are notified about it. Furthermore, Google does not systematically screen every video that is posted for appropriateness (like Apple does with the App Store) and Google does not directly make revenue off the specific content or quality of YouTube videos (like Apple does with the App Store).

Everyone does it, why does everyone just assume it's only Google that does it.

Everyone seems to have this evil image of Google.

Very true. National TV networks know exactly where you are watching your TV set so they can direct local advertising to your TV, frequent shopper cards do not just give you discounts - they also trcak your purchasing habits so they can sent coupons to you, Amazon monitors your browsing on their websites to further recommend similar books, credit card companies will monitor your spending habits to send you advertising, etc. It is clearly not just "evil Google" practising this.

 

[Popeye206]

Can you post the UDID from all of your iOS devices, please?

As a matter of fact, everybody who says the UDID means nothing, post yours to prove your point. If you feel they are not at risk, then you should have no problem publicly posting yours, correct?

00000000-0000-1000-8000-0017G2CD4C39

Okay... so now what do you know about me?????

 

[arn]

Can you post the UDID from all of your iOS devices, please?

As a matter of fact, everybody who says the UDID means nothing, post yours to prove your point. If you feel they are not at risk, then you should have no problem publicly posting yours, correct?

All our UDIDs on TouchArcade are public:
http://toucharcade.com/about/

 

[wirelessmacuser]

The other thing that makes me feel better that is that Apples iron grip on their own iOS is much more likely to prevent the security holes that can be punched through Android.

If you honestly "feel better"*

Think again...

It's advertising on the web or via apps. You're being watched and your personal info is being collected, no matter what any company says. It's all about the money. The same money Apple's fanboys brag about Apple collecting just as though it was going into their pockets.

"Apples iron grip" is a myth, they're as greedy as the rest. The true difference, one which Steve Jobs gets the credit for, is his expertise as the master CONvincing MAN.*

The people of the world wait with baited breath for his every word. Then the puppets like Walt Mossberg bow down & validate his words with gushing praise.

 

[BaldiMac]

This is simply not true. Apple not only sanctions every individual app in its App Store, it provides bandwidth for distribution, it facilitates a well-oiled user-friendly distribution method, and even makes money off each app sold. And remember, one of Apple arguments for the approval process is to protect the end-user.

So, are you arguing that Apple should exert more control over third party software?

Especially considering that the FTC investigated when Apple announced plans to disallow the transmission of UDIDs to third party ad networks.

 

[fishmoose]

I think the fundamental difference between Google and Apple's ads effort is that Apple sells you a product, for Google you are the product. In terms of collecting data that means while Apple may do it they have less reason to sell such data to advertisers. If apps collects data for advertising or usage statistics that's a whole other story but since Apple has a curated store they can easily add a rule that states that you may not collect any usage data at all within your application. Google could never do this since it would hurt their core business which is selling their product you.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

This is scary and a good argument for "indie" developers to form an LLC. Your free hobby app could cost you your home and wages.

 

[Mawal]

Have any of you read the WSJ article concerning privacy and apps? I did.

Bottom line Apple apps were by no means "better" in terms of privacy preservation than the Android apps.

Relying on Apple to preserve ones privacy doesn't work.

While I think this lawsuit is basically a money machine or the lawyers involved, I feel it is important that companies learn that disrespect of privacy issues will come at a price.

 

[Kenrik]

your iphone ties you to a unique AT&T account. it's the holy grail since trying to figure out who is who has been a problem in the last 10 years with internet advertising.

you open an app and it sends known data about you which is then compared with other data that has been collected to market to you

Um... No Not right at all.

Developers have no access to who owns what phone based on the Device ID.. Apple is the only one who has that information... AT&T Identifies you by your SIM card. Something they have been able to do for Many, Many, Years and way before the iPhone was even a glimmer in Ole Stevy boys eyes.

So yes you can identify a specific device but you can't identify an individual unless they enter their information into your app and if they are doing that you better have a EULA and Privacy Policy built into the App having them agree to how the info will be used.

I'm working on an App that will do exactly what is described in this lawsuit.. Use the device ID plus user input for more targeted advertising. But I sure as hell am going to ASK my users if they want to participate before that information is used and it will have an Opt-Out feature if they change their minds.

I really don't understand what all of the hoopla is about though as A LOT OF OTHER COMPANIES have done much worse for years and years...
I work in the advertising business and trust me, companies like Valassis have much more information on you than you even know, and guess who gave it to them? The US Postal Service and the Census..

Hah if you use Google, they know where you are at all times, watch all of your searches, know your calendar info, read your email, Know what TV shows you watch (even the ones on skinimax) and will soon know what color underwear you had on last monday..

Don't pretend to be shocked at all of this and don't go trying to sue over it. Most of it is 100% legal. The only ones I see running into issues are the developers who conveniently forgot to tell the user that they were collecting the info or provide any type of privacy policy.

Sucks to be them..