Apple and Facebook Reportedly Discussed 'Revenue-Sharing' Ideas in Past

[Junior117]

It's quite straight forward. Apple stated they are against search engines selling user data to advertisers that is mined from those users' search queries. Apple said that is not the kind of company it wants to be. Apple then accepted billions of dollars from Google to make it the default search engine on iOS, which gives Google the preferred position to accept search queries from Apple users and mine and sell the data from their search engine queries. It's right there in black, direct from the CEO:

I’m speaking to you from Silicon Valley, where some of the most prominent and successful companies have built their businesses by lulling their customers into complacency about their personal information,” said Cook. “They’re gobbling up everything they can learn about you and trying to monetize it. We think that’s wrong. And it’s not the kind of company that Apple wants to be.”'

“We believe the customer should be in control of their own information. You might like these so-called free services, but we don’t think they’re worth having your email, your search history and now even your family photos data mined and sold off for god knows what advertising purpose. And we think some day, customers will see this for what it is.”

Okay: we're going in circles.
- Will you or will you not show me evidence that proves that Google is harvesting data from Apple products in exchange for money?
- Will you or will you not show me evidence that proves that Meta is completely free to harvest data off of iOS devices in addition to the subscription plans and the 30% cut?

If the answer is yes, just say "yes." And if the answer is no, then just say "no." I'm not going to look at the quote and simply assume they're not following their word just because they have a deal with Google (like with most other browsers, including Mozilla Firefox, which states in plain text that they're for privacy) that they will be allowed to be the default search engine in Apple's products in exchange for money.

I don't know: it just sounds like you're saying that it's fact in spite of the lack of evidence (and that the quote is somehow proof that all of this stuff you're saying is true, no questions asked.

 

[BootsWalking]

Okay: we're going in circles.
- Will you or will you not show me evidence that proves that Google is harvesting data from Apple products in exchange for money?
- Will you or will you not show me evidence that proves that Meta is completely free to harvest data off of iOS devices in addition to the subscription plans and the 30% cut?

If the answer is yes, just say "yes." And if the answer is no, then just say "no." I'm not going to look at the quote and simply assume they're not following their word just because they have a deal with Google (like with most other browsers, including Mozilla Firefox, which states in plain text that they're for privacy) that they will be allowed to be the default search engine in Apple's products in exchange for money.

I don't know: it just sounds like you're saying that it's fact in spite of the lack of evidence (and that the quote is somehow proof that all of this stuff you're saying is true, no questions asked.

On your iPhone or iPad go to Settings -> Safari -> Advanced -> Website Data. Type "google" in the search bar. On my iPhone it shows 95MB of data stored on my phone by Google, of all which is accessible to Google via javascript running on any page within the google.com domain. Google can put anything they want in that data and some of it will be unique references Google can use to tie all your queries stored on their severs. Any users logged into google while performing those queries means the information is not just correlated to itself but to you personally as well. That's called search history and that's what Apple claimed they are against.

You already asked me about Facebook harvesting and I already gave you an answer. There is nothing within the WSJ article stating Facebook would be prohibited from mining data obtained during your interaction with the app. Since google can mine the search data based on browser local storage there is no reason Facebook couldn't do the same with their own WebKit implementation. In fact there was a story about a researcher discovering them doing so just this week.

Hope that helps.

 

[Dr@g0n]

"Ask App Not to Track" is still wrong. It should be "Tell App Not to Track and Make Very Sure It Can't".

Facebook try to break the system as a hacker and as you know, the new idea of hacking something raise everyday, so how to be “very sure”?

 

[0924487]

"Ask App Not to Track" is still wrong. It should be "Tell App Not to Track and Make Very Sure It Can't".

It's impossible from an Engineering standpoint.

 

[0924487]

So just like many of Apple’s recent privacy stances, it’s mostly just virtue signaling. Not really grounded in principle…

It's to weaken Apple's systematic competitors.

Facebook is not Apple's direct competitor, but if Facebook is doing too well and is swimming in money, they can invest and make something that can potentially disrupt Apple's business model.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

Tim Cook spoke out against Google and Facebook's privacy monetization practices in 2015. One company agreed to pay Apple $10 billion a year to stay in its good graces, the other turned Apple down and is now losing $10 billion a year in lost ad-targeting revenue after Apple changed the default app tracking setting in iOS. I hate Facebook with a passion but this just doesn't sit right with me. Either you're for privacy or not - it shouldn't be situational, based on whether someone hands you bags of money.

Yep. All the fans who cheer on Apple as the anti-privacy wonders are fooling themselves. All Apple cares about is money. Your privacy is pure collateral damage, merely waiting for the right $opportunity.

 

[sideshowuniqueuser]

It will be best for the world and humanity if Facebook does not associate with Apple.

When it comes to privacy, I don't think Facebook has the same core values as Apple does.

Yeah except, according to this article, it is FB than walked away from the deal because Apple wanted too big a cut, not Apple that walked away from it. Apple's and FB's core values are identical, and are simply "greed is good".

Steve Job's core values were - "If you keep your eye on the profit, you’re going to skimp on the product. But if you focus on making really great products, then the profits will follow."

Tim Cook's core values are - "Greed is good. Turn the screws to wring the maximum profit out of every situation, and my personal bonus growth will follow."

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

Yeah except, according to this article, it is FB than walked away from the deal because Apple wanted too big a cut, not Apple that walked away from it. Apple's and FB's core values are identical, and are simply "greed is good".

Steve Job's core values were - "If you keep your eye on the profit, you’re going to skimp on the product. But if you focus on making really great products, then the profits will follow."

Tim Cook's core values are - "Greed is good. Turn the screws to wring the maximum profit out of every situation, and my personal bonus growth will follow."

Nicely said! 👏

 

[siddavis]

I'll judge Apple based on their actions, not on a rumor about what they may have thought about doing.

Me too. As stated in a previous post,

1. Google default search
2. CSAM (I realize this one is controversial just how much privacy is breached)
3. Anything China wants

If this had come to fruition, it parallels nicely with #1.

 

[Admiralbison]

Tim Cook spoke out against Google and Facebook's privacy monetization practices in 2015. One company agreed to pay Apple $10 billion a year to stay in its good graces, the other turned Apple down and is now losing $10 billion a year in lost ad-targeting revenue after Apple changed the default app tracking setting in iOS. I hate Facebook with a passion but this just doesn't sit right with me. Either you're for privacy or not - it shouldn't be situational, based on whether someone hands you bags of money.

LOL.

Apple loves peoples' privacy...if its under their control and they can monetize it.

Apple talks big about privacy and security especially if it's a threat to their wall gardened iOS and monopoly App store, especially to Congress.

Which they successfully -bribed-..er I mean lobbied Senator Schumacher to postpone votes on anti-trust measures, but when in court in regards to openness and freedom for users, there is concern about malware and throw MacOS under the bus.

 

[mrochester]

If that's the case then why does the CEO of Apple try at every opportunity to get on his soapbox and virtue signal to the world?

Because it makes them money.

 

[svish]

Hopefully Apple and Meta don't form any kind of partnership. Facebook cannot be trusted.

 

[JustSomebody12]

"Ask App Not to Track" is still wrong. It should be "Tell App Not to Track and Make Very Sure It Can't".

I think they are trying, but it's hard not to be tracked online.

 

[polyphenol]

It's impossible from an Engineering standpoint.

But you can keep working at it. And keep checking that existing anti-tracking works as intended.

And stop in-app browsers from getting round all the restrictions. Even if that means banning apps rather than implementing engineering solutions.

 

[0924487]

But you can keep working at it. And keep checking that existing anti-tracking works as intended.

And stop in-app browsers from getting round all the restrictions. Even if that means banning apps rather than implementing engineering solutions.

There is no way the OS can stop app developers from using server-based user profiling and device fingerprinting.

Just like there is no way to design a vest that can stop a precision rifle round that weighs less than 1 pound.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

Nobody should be surprised. Apple/Cook are enormously disingenuous on privacy , there was a great piece by the Atlantic about this a few years ago.

Once you are taking Googles money for access to your user base any talk about protecting those user privacy seems very insincere.

Apple uses privacy as a marketing schtick, sadly it's one that a lot of people lap up unquestioningly.

 

[cyanite]

"Ask App Not to Track" is still wrong. It should be "Tell App Not to Track and Make Very Sure It Can't".

That’s unfortunately not technically feasible. That’s why it’s a combination of technical enforcement and license agreement.

Are you sure because that means Facebook will be invading your privacy and finding out what you do 24/7? They will have access to all your data. Are you ok with that?

That’s very exaggerated and also irrelevant to what the article is about.

apple privacy for sale...shocker

No. Read the article.

So Apple was willing to sell out their users' privacy if Facebook shared some of their revenue with Apple.

No. Read the article.

 

[0111587]

Apple is like the Mafia, give us 30% of your revenue or we will hurt your business!

 

[mrochester]

Apple is like the Mafia, give us 30% of your revenue or we will hurt your business!

That’s not really how it works. The 30% commission is transparent and known to developers before they ever decide to do business with Apple.

 

[hagar]

Apple: these discussions didn’t lead to any collaboration.
This forum: Apple is evil and hates privacy.

 

[genovelle]

Tim Cook spoke out against Google and Facebook's privacy monetization practices in 2015. One company agreed to pay Apple $10 billion a year to stay in its good graces, the other turned Apple down and is now losing $10 billion a year in lost ad-targeting revenue after Apple changed the default app tracking setting in iOS. I hate Facebook with a passion but this just doesn't sit right with me. Either you're for privacy or not - it shouldn't be situational, based on whether someone hands you bags of money.

Privacy relates to knowledge and by consistently calling out the practices publicly Apple had proven they are committed to privacy. Allowing Google to pay to be the default search engine does not breach their privacy stance at all.

First, the vast majority of their customers prefer Google search because already use it on their other devices. It removes friction from their customers experience. The two items are not in conflict because they are still subject to the same rules and still complains that Apple doesn’t give them access to all the data they want.

There’s a reason why Google had to find an exploit to continue to track customers who blocked tracking and was caught and fined for it. So while Apple haters will claim Apple allows Google to thwart privacy for cash, it’s not true.

Apple allows google to remain the default engine because it’s better at this point and more in demand. That doesn’t mean they should have it as free access. Google is happy to pay a share of revenue, because they don’t want Apple to feel the need to create their own.

 

[genovelle]

That’s not really how it works. The 30% commission is transparent and known to developers before they ever decide to do business with Apple.

LOL, like how the upper ranks shot down the deal with Google, a privacy violator as bad as Facebook?

The partnership and revenue sharing with Google goes back to the first IPhone and predates Google buying Android and deciding to become a direct competitor. The data they have access to via the iPhone is limited by design and why Google was caught and fined for circumventing the anti tracking measures Apple implemented. If they had free reign to data, they would’ve need to do that.

When you choose to login to google accounts, use gmail or Google Docs you are automatically signed on to all their platforms for tracking and legally give them permission. Apple now forces them to tell you what’s happening.

The difference is people are dependent on google in ways Facebook can’t replicate.

 

[BootsWalking]

Privacy relates to knowledge and by consistently calling out the practices publicly Apple had proven they are committed to privacy. Allowing Google to pay to be the default search engine does not breach their privacy stance at all.

First, the vast majority of their customers prefer Google search because already use it on their other devices. It removes friction from their customers experience. The two items are not in conflict because they are still subject to the same rules and still complains that Apple doesn’t give them access to all the data they want.

There’s a reason why Google had to find an exploit to continue to track customers who blocked tracking and was caught and fined for it. So while Apple haters will claim Apple allows Google to thwart privacy for cash, it’s not true.

Apple allows google to remain the default engine because it’s better at this point and more in demand. That doesn’t mean they should have it as free access. Google is happy to pay a share of revenue, because they don’t want Apple to feel the need to create their own.

Apple disagrees with you. They believe monetizing your searches is against user privacy:

“We believe the customer should be in control of their own information. You might like these so-called free services, but we don’t think they’re worth having your email, your search history and now even your family photos data mined and sold off for god knows what advertising purpose. And we think some day, customers will see this for what it is.”

Source: https://techcrunch.com/2015/06/02/apples-tim-cook-delivers-blistering-speech-on-encryption-privacy/

 

[BootsWalking]

The partnership and revenue sharing with Google goes back to the first IPhone and predates Google buying Android and deciding to become a direct competitor. The data they have access to via the iPhone is limited by design and why Google was caught and fined for circumventing the anti tracking measures Apple implemented. If they had free reign to data, they would’ve need to do that.

When you choose to login to google accounts, use gmail or Google Docs you are automatically signed on to all their platforms for tracking and legally give them permission. Apple now forces them to tell you what’s happening.

The difference is people are dependent on google in ways Facebook can’t replicate.

On your iPhone or iPad go to Settings -> Safari -> Advanced -> Website Data. Type "google" in the search bar. On my iPhone it shows 95MB of data stored on my phone by Google, of all which is accessible to Google via javascript running on any page within the google.com domain. Google can put anything they want in that data and some of it will be unique references Google can use to tie all your queries stored on their severs. Furthermore, and as you indicated, users logged into google while performing those queries means the information is not just correlated to itself but to you personally as well.

 

[dumastudetto]

I support whatever increases that stock price.

Me too. It’s good for product innovation and R&D and, of course, those who choose to be investors in the greatest company on god’s earth.