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.
Federal Lawmakers Questioning Steve Jobs Regarding Location Data Collection
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And the fact that there's no way to compare (and highlight) the current Privacy/Agreement to the new one...that really ticks me off...Apple updates the policy like every 60 days and I have no idea what they changed. Add this, remove that, re-word this, etc. Total BS if you ask me.
I'm glad the Feds are looking into this. Has anyone tried downloading an app (on the iPhone 3GS), getting the new agreement, and stating that you do not agree to it?...what happens? Can I/we never download an app again until we agree? Does Apple lock my current apps so that I cannot use them until I agree? What about making phone calls? Does Apple shut down my phone if I don't agree to their terms? I'm serious.
-Eric
Corporate = do anything to make a profit. Google, Apple, twinkle... all the same.
+1 for Godwin.
Mike Godwin? Yawn.......!
How about my 'first law'?
" Life is a manure sandwich.....eat it or starve."
I didn't live during the Hoover years in the FBI but I've been around for the last 45 and what I think you fail to realize is they (Big Bro. etc.) are already getting this info from all of us, this electronic world makes us an open book how about Face-book and all the social sites where people are geo tagging photos etc. I just don't think Steve Jobs is up to becoming a criminal empire.
There's not a lot they could use against me and also any info you have out there in this world is one subpoena away from getting.
Come on and think rationally. If you don't agree to the terms and conditions of the App Store, then you won't be able to download any more applications. This is how everything in the real world works. Your old applications are fine, and your phone is not shut down. For goodness sake, I just want you to know that Apple is not as evil of a corporation as so many paranoid people tend to think it is.
And many more people want you to know that apple is not the nice guy company that fanboys think they are.
Apple did let us know how to opt out. Directons to oo.apple.com are in the Users Agreement that a user must agree to before using the software. If one cares enough to get this upset about the issue of privacy, then one should care enough to actually read what they are agreeing to. If one clicks <Agree> without reading, it is their own fault.
again as i understand it, location based data must always explicitly be accepted by the user. if a developer includes iads in their ap and the ad is going to use location data it must ask the user's permission.
it is categorically not without your permission. in fact apple gives you a heads-up not once but twice. the first time is buried in the oblique terms of service you must agree to when activating a new phone. it's not an easy read and i suspect most people will skip it (fyi in a separate TOS, you agree to at&t grabbing data too). apple then very specifically asks your permission to grab data by throwing up a modal window saying something along the lines of "we would like to collect diagnostic data to help improve products/service, is that ok with you?"
for people who are concerned about privacy it's a simple matter to decline.
Joe Barton is an idiot, but I do agree with what they said in the letter. Yes, you can disable the collection of real-time tracking data, but doing so requires you to basically shut off location services. You should be able to keep location services on for apps but block Apple from collecting real-time tracking data on you (which, even anonymously collected, has been shown to be exploitable and can be used to identify you personally).
You can, but then you're crippling a major feature of the phone. They should be separate.
Ironic that Barton (is this the same guy?) should go from pointing out the president's gross gangster tactics of abusing the power of government to turning around and attempting to do the same. Limits of power mean nothing to these criminals and Obama and Barton can be the first against the wall when it all goes down. Disgusting from all sides.
It's not too hard to write an If...Then statement in software that states if you don't agree to the terms then it launches a sub-process to lock A,B,C.
I'm not saying Apple is evil...I'm saying these "agreements" are ridiculous since they are 30+ pages long, nowhere near in laymens terms, and when we get prompted every 60 days to "accept" new terms, I have no idea WHAT has changed.
Not cool. I'm seriously considering NOT going back to the App store due to this original topic as well as the never-ending "agree or else" garbage Apple forces upon me.
No other electronic item in my possession has ever asked me to keep agreeing to new terms...nothing. Heck, credit card companies do it once a year at worst.
-Eric
None of this is new.
The government is already collecting all of this data. Web portals have been built by wireless carriers to allow law enforcement easy access to call and text records. Projects like Carnivore, Echelon, NarusInsight, Calea, and Cipav have been in existence many years for the sole purpose of monitoring and collecting data from private citizens.
The real issue here is that Apple is doing it instead of the government, and its very different from what Google did with the whole wireless data capture while driving down the road. Google made a mistake, and I cant see how anything they were able to collect would be of any use. I seriously doubt Apple would come forward like Google did if they had done the same thing.
On the other hand, Apple is deliberately collecting the data as part of its "iAd" BS that its planning to implement on the iPhone...etc. The gov doesnt like Google or Apple collecting this data because...well...its the governments job to do it.
The government is already collecting all of this data. Web portals have been built by wireless carriers to allow law enforcement easy access to call and text records. Projects like Carnivore, Echelon, NarusInsight, Calea, and Cipav have been in existence many years for the sole purpose of monitoring and collecting data from private citizens.
The real issue here is that Apple is doing it instead of the government, and its very different from what Google did with the whole wireless data capture while driving down the road. Google made a mistake, and I cant see how anything they were able to collect would be of any use. I seriously doubt Apple would come forward like Google did if they had done the same thing.
On the other hand, Apple is deliberately collecting the data as part of its "iAd" BS that its planning to implement on the iPhone...etc. The gov doesnt like Google or Apple collecting this data because...well...its the governments job to do it.
Mine said 45 pages. I uh...skimmed over it. Isn't there some law about making user agreements reasonably understandable and readable? Asking people to read through 45 pages of legalese seems ridiculous, and this is just one of many such agreements people encounter every day.
The agreements have to be that way, just one thing not said just right or one thing not there the attorneys have a field day with lawsuits against company's with money. Remember it pays to be stupid just take a look at all the frivolous lawsuits that people win for ignorance. They need to protect themselves hence the 45 page read. Come on we learn as kids to read before you sign or it's your own fault, elementary 101.
The location and moves of the users of its products is none of Apple's business.
It violates privacy rights.
Why not have the mic on 24/7 as well?
How about GPS tracking devices in cars to gain more "valuable information" for "better service" by car makers?
It violates privacy rights.
Why not have the mic on 24/7 as well?
How about GPS tracking devices in cars to gain more "valuable information" for "better service" by car makers?
exactly! 45 pages?! Even 10 pages is too long. It's one thing to have that agreement for the first time you install a piece of software...it's another to keep changing it and asking people to keep reading it and asking people to find the hidden changes in the agreement. Seriously. There should be a law that states the changes to these agreements need to be in a highlighted/page for page comparison so people can find out if it was just 2 sentences at the end of the doc or there were 112 sentences all over the place.
