In other news all four carriers mysteriously raised their rates for new customers. Weird?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
FCC to Propose Fining AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile $200M for Sharing Customer Location Data
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How about the $200 M goes directly to the customers that were impacted ?
The customers will need it after the companies jack up their prices to pay for the fine.
The customers will need it after the companies jack up their prices to pay for the fine.
200 million is a drop in the bucket for these companies. It’s the equivalent of fining me $20 bucks. That’s not enough to stop them from doing it again. Not even close. I’m tired of the whole “corporations are people” nonsense. Corporations aren’t people, people are people. Read the Constitution. You won’t find that term corporation anywhere in it. Corporations are state based legal entities. If you simply passed a law that required locking up whichever C level executive signed off on the decision (or should’ve known what was happening if he or she was asleep at the wheel) for 3 to 6 months and fined that person 50% of their stock options and a couple of years worth of their salary that would be an actual deterrent corporations would take seriously. Fining the company? They couldn’t care less. They still get their millions in salary, stock options and a golden parachute when they are fired or retire.
Last edited:
I wish the FCC could require that fines like these be paid out of executive decision-makers' salaries rather than out of income from paying customers.
Jail time will be the only way to make them sit up and think they’re decisions.
I can't find a reference to how many location pings were sold in total, but I have to believe $200m doesn't even wipe out their profit let alone penalize them.
Yeah, you might find that they suddenly stop sharing location data with bail bondsmen at the very least...
Yeah, you might find that they suddenly stop sharing location data with bail bondsmen at the very least...
The fine will be forgotten as soon as it is passed along to the same customers that were stolen from. Why not just make them accountable by leveraging free service for a year or two and rate freezes for 5 years. Where does this fine get paid to anyway? Seems like a circle jerk to me!
Small fee for what they are doing. They make much more with that data. If they are charged more they will just increase our phone bills a few dollars each month. It doesn’t change what they are doing in one bit.
Customers will pay for this fine through some stupid new charges on our bills
Do we know how much was made by selling location data? My guess is it was much less than $200M but my guess is no better than others'. For those who think this is not enough, you can bet that if they're caught again, the fine will be WAY higher than $200M.
A fine is just that, a fine. It won't change the fact that these companies will continue doing what they are doing.
Happens all the time, fines don't deter it. Quick search..
"In April 2011, P&G was fined 211.2 million euros by the European Commission for establishing a price-fixing cartel for washing powder in Europe along with Unilever, who was fined 104 million euros, and Henkel. Though the fine was set higher at first, it was discounted by 10% after P&G and Unilever admitted running the cartel. As the provider of the tip-off leading to investigations, Henkel was not fined."
"In April 2011, P&G was fined 211.2 million euros by the European Commission for establishing a price-fixing cartel for washing powder in Europe along with Unilever, who was fined 104 million euros, and Henkel. Though the fine was set higher at first, it was discounted by 10% after P&G and Unilever admitted running the cartel. As the provider of the tip-off leading to investigations, Henkel was not fined."
Exactly, and all it does is pass right through to prices, hurting the consumers doubly.
[automerge]1582904285[/automerge]
Not if selling it makes more than $50M
[automerge]1582904386[/automerge]
Yea this always cracks me up. I just wish one time some big company with their services would accidently send me even a portion of the monthly payment.
They fine should also include the inability to raise prices on consumers due to their fine. Not sure how they could enforce that since these companies would claim it was for something else. Maybe just freeze price increases for a specified time. Again, once that time hit the process would go up.
Normal People Logic
Person 1: Should I share this sensitive data for money?
Person 2: Is it illegal to share it?
Person 1: Yes.
Person 2: Then no you shouldn't.
Person 1: Good Idea. I won't.
Cell Phone Company Logic
Person 1: Should I share this sensitive data for money?
Person 2: Is it illegal to share it?
Person 1: Yes.
Person 2: Why not? What's the worst that can happen?
Person 1: Good Idea. I think we will to make some extra money after overcharging our customers for
phones, services, and even taxes.
Person 1: Should I share this sensitive data for money?
Person 2: Is it illegal to share it?
Person 1: Yes.
Person 2: Then no you shouldn't.
Person 1: Good Idea. I won't.
Cell Phone Company Logic
Person 1: Should I share this sensitive data for money?
Person 2: Is it illegal to share it?
Person 1: Yes.
Person 2: Why not? What's the worst that can happen?
Person 1: Good Idea. I think we will to make some extra money after overcharging our customers for
phones, services, and even taxes.
Last edited:
Nah. Make it $2B and suddenly they find a reason to all coincidentally raise rates. And industry consolidation and lenient anti-trust enforcement means they can get away with it.
Maybe yes or maybe no but who cares? It comes to something like $0.75/phone in the USA so as a one-time charge, who would really notice?
But if these things are really passed through, think about how much our phones would cost if these companies didn't pay any taxes? No, I don't believe that, either.
We also need a congress that makes unambiguous laws about the rights of consumers. There needs to clear laws about what kinds of data can legally be collected, how it can be collected, how it can be used, and there needs to be a mechanism for people who opt out....to not inadvertently be tracked all the time despite trying to opt out.
But that might take decades?
But that might take decades?
Yes, there I was referring to Carpenter. I wasn‘t meaning to suggest a perfect equivalence, there are of course aspects of the situations which differ. But I think the comparison is fair. The federal government not long ago argued that it could, without a warrant (and obviously without explicit consent from users), compel carriers to turn over location data to it. And now it’s saying that those carriers can’t sell location data to others without explicit consent from users.