Slashdot Mirror
Motorola's Getting To Know You
LordNimon was the first to write with "ZDNet has an article on how Motorola is demanding all of the private consumer data from each of its dealers, or the dealer will no longer be able to sell Motorola products. The article is unusually thorough for ZDNet. It includes comments from big Motorola customers who consider this data to be confidential and are furious over the plan. It also mentions that Motorola refuses to comment on the privacy aspect of the plan, or even acknowledge that there's anything wrong with it!" A very thorough look at behind-the-scenes marketing forces.
I've been wondering for a while what "Digital DNA" is; I guess that's it! It's "DNA of the Digital Kind"--personal information that identifies you, except digitally.
I thought it was just a dumb marketing ploy for Motorola technology, but now I know it's an even dumber ploy for Motorola marketing. Well, my answer is the same for both kinds of DNA: it's mine; hands off.
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Isn't Motorola stuck at half the clock speed of Intel (Mhz is the only thing 'non-geek' people look at when buying a computer, trust me I do it every day)
Isn't Motorola screwed if Apple decides to make OS X Intel Compatable?
Is'nt Motorola on such a roll here? Why would they be so hostile towards themselves by pulling this stunt?
If you have stock in them, perhaps its time to pull out...
The only thing they are still doing ok at is the consumer devices, like cell phones. Perhaps if they keep getting screwed, they'll retract to that core? Any thoughts?
Motorolla is not doing anything here that any other worldwide e-commerce company is. They are mapping demographic data against their marketing efforts to either more sharply target their market or to analyze how to ramp up into other markets. It's not like they want your SSN or your blood type. Lighten up, this is as harmless as cookies, how could they possiblyu use this information to do harm? It's not like the fed is snooping in your home, it;s simply commercial data. More companied aught to follow suit, it would save on the enourmouse amounts of spam we reveive daily, from comercials, banners, billboards and telemarketers.
A couple of thousand dealers doing the same [be generous, share your script kiddie's work] and Motorola will have a completely worthless database.
Where there are at least sensible laws against this kind of thing. Unfortunately in America where your very soul is up for sale on the "free" market, this can and will go ahead in the name of customer demographics and targetted advertising.
This is just another example of how freedom and the free market are totally incompatible. When you have a free market every aspect of your life is for sale, and without your permission or knowledge. And sane policies protecting people are voted down since they would interfere with the holy mission of "wealth creation" that America knows and loves.
Think of all the newfound students they can nail for cell phones...
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
"I don't want any information relative to anything I do shared with anyone. Our business is our business. I don't want anyone to know what equipment I use, when I use it and how I use it," said Silverman, whose company uses the radios to dispatch trucks.
(sound of flamethrowers being ignited)
Somebody will probably reply with some 'land of the free bla bla bla', look how free those dealers are....
Jeroen
Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
They just want to be closer to their customers, like in the familly. The want to be your good, older brother. Big brother.
Indeed it will probably also happen in some other banana republics :)
Whereas in civilised countries trying to pull this sort of stunt tends to be illegal.
Firstly, when one fills out one's warranty card for one's two-way radio, doesn't the manufacturer get this information anyway?
Secondly, how many people out there give this information to a store when you buy something? I know that I certainly DO NOT - primarily because I don't want my mailbox flooded with junk mail from the store or whoever they sell or have to give their data to.
Anyone who is worried about this as a consumer - you don't have to give your name at any store, and you don't have to fill in your warranty card.....
Wow, Motorola two-way radios support High 128-bit Encryption now?
--
The shareholder is always right.
The only possible explanation that doesn't make Motorola sound like evil bastards is the concept that they're simply asking for this information in an effort to be closer to their customers.
Unfortunately, their completely faceless corporate tone and unwilliingness to so much as comment on their new Radius policy totally contradicts the idea of doing right by the customer. I wasn't even able to find a press release on their corporate website.
When will companies realize that if they alienate customers and screw the local businessman across our street, customers will go somewhere else??
-- "It has recently been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."
The best way to express your opinion of these tactics is to vote with your feet, and strike a nerve in their hip pocket. Since common sense seems to have dropped from the marketing curriculum these days, a simple negative growth in the sales figures ought to do the trick.
I've been a big fan of Motorola (CPUs) for the past twenty years until this afternoon when I read this article. It turns my stomach to read that Motorola has always acted this way ("Motorola's way or the highway"). Holy cow!
If this is their enlightened turn-of-the-century conduct, then what is in store for computer users?
Is this DUN number unassailable? Seems like a server loaded either with fake names, or with names of large institutional customers who are already listed in Motorola's database, might be of use..
Oh yeah, Japan does have a privacy law but then again nobody raises a cry when this kind of thing happens..
How about consumers turn this against Motorola?
Maybe its time for us to ask personal information of employees at these companies, how would they like to have thier information sold, analyzed, and then to be targeted for solicitation?
Im sure Motorola would find this to be a different story, and would say that dilvulging thier employee's personal information would be a constitutional infringement and would fight it all the way through, but they dont stop to think about how the consumers feel.
They think consumers are just a bunch of mindless animals that need to be organized and cataloged.
Maybe if they had a higher respect for the people that make those companies what they are, they would have a better reputation, not a reputation of law suit happy, information hungry monopolies.
I know that if I find out my personal information was sold without my permition, which probably has already happened, I would fight it up to the courts, and I think its time for consumers to demand their information be kept confidential.
This is getting real sad, from the CueCat propoganda that tracked your scanniong habbits and stored your name and address in an online database that was eventualy hacked, to Motorola demanding this personal information that will most probably be sold to 3rd parties for targeted solicitation. Im really sick of this.
Maybe some day Ill move to a remote island and make my own rules and such.
Systems Administrator
Servu Networks
http://www.servuhome.net
Brent Jones
They are unconcerned becase you are reaching Motorola's marketers...
Just goes to show you just how evil marketing as an institution is. Marketers don't care about being intrusive, they aren't concerned about privacy or convienience. Their perfect world is one where they can restrain you and force you to listen to their pitch. And they are trying harder and harder to achieve this, because the more foreceful marketing becomes (and it is far more aggressive than it was 10 years ago), the more resistant "consumers" become, and therefore the more foreceful and intrusive the marketers try to be.
One of the biggest problem with company websites, IMO, is that they let the marketers run them. Which is why you have to wade thru useless padlum to get to the product or support info, or driver you are looking for. I see this every day.
If I owned a Motorola product, like a phone or pager, etc, I'd be marching back to the dealer return the product for a refund, and demand that all info recorded by the dealer be returned.
If I were an ethical dealer, I'd find something else to sell. Plenty of other companies make the consumer products Motorola does. If this happens to any significant degree, management will rein in the marketers on this one.
In 2000 America, is a non-lawyer truly free?
Would it be possible for the reseller to send in a report to Motorola saying that the reseller themselves are the customer. ("Last month, you sold x units to me, and my contact details are ...").
Or, could the reseller set up a re-reseller that they sell to, and then the re-reseller (which, no doubt, would share the same premises and much of the same staff etc) would then sell to the customer.
Motorola, of course, would not like such a tactic, but what could they legally do about it? They could forbid selling to the re-resellers, but if enough of the resellers go with such a tactic, Motorola would end up putting themselves out of the retail business.
Distributors serve a purpose : they give the manufacturer access to customers and give the customers service along with the products. Of course, Motorola could do that as well, but specialists usually do things more efficiently. Once Motorola loses the cooperation of specialists, the company will realize that pretending to be good at everything may be overly ambitious, but it will be too late because the distributors will have begun proposing their customers the products from other manufacturers.
Motorola looks like the big baddie in this story, but whoever knows the customer intimately and serves him well packs a lot of power too. What we have here may look like one sided bullying, but the distributors are armed for bargaining.
If they feel weak, it means that their knowledge of their market segments and the service they offer is not sufficient to add value, which means that they serve no purpose to manufacturers and they better learn new tricks before everybody realizes that.
It is pretty obvious as to why they want to do this. With the internet, prices become more transparent and competitors with more efficient manufacturing processes can undercut wholesale prices. The only differentiating factor is service which is human intensive and anathema for a company stuck in the industrial manufacturing mindset. In order to avoid being out of the loop, they need to dominate both ends of the value chain much like IBM with their components and their global services. By controlling the customer market information, they can then bully errr ... incentivate :-) their "independent" sales dealer network (cough). Unfortunately the golden rule applies, he who has the gold makes the rules. If you look at certain car manufacturing, they've basically marginalised independent mechanics by offering warentees valid only if the customer returns to the company's (centralised) body shop for periodic checkups and have another go at gorging your pocket with custom-designed and oh-so-breakable expensive fenders. Guess how the independent mechanics feel about this one? Expect computer manufacturers to start thinking along the same line because as soon as they convince the customer to return for a yearly upgrade as part of their laptop service warentee, they can preload yet more bloatware to demonstrate the "obvious" need to upgrade to a faster machine.
LL
What makes a Capitalist economy democratic is that in very few instances (the government, corporate monopolies) do you ever HAVE to buy someone's product.
There are bazillions of companies that make what Motorola makes. Buy their products instead, and make sure you let them know that you chose them BECAUSE of the privacy issue.
Citizens of a free country with a capitalist economy control everything with their wallets, even if they don't realize it. Look at Firestone, they are ruined because they failed to respond to the will of their customers on the SUV tire issue, and now I doubt many dealers can sell Firestone tires at any price, much less what they were being sold at before.
Those who let themselves be led to believe that they are sheep "consumers", not CITIZENS, are the ones the marketers rule.
Vote with your wallet and your feet.
In 2000 America, is a non-lawyer truly free?
Then here's the bad news for you:
You're doomed!
Save for very few cases of personal data storage and retrieval (banks, medical, video rental - actually that was mentioned in the article). You have NO privacy rights in the US.
That's NO as in nada, njet zilch, etc. Businesses can do whatever they please with your data. And apparently even extremely sensitive data (medical) is in the process of becoming a public corporate good.
Don't want your financial information shared? Better read this boring letter your bank sends to you. It's intentionally boring so you don't read it to the end. The end says that you have to opt out if you don't want your (financial !) data shared.
It's getting worse. Under "save harbour" (what a laughable joke), US companies have to treat data of their European customers better then the one of their US customers otherwise they lose their rights to transfer data from their EU customers to the US (unfortunately somebody forgot to state how this is enforced).
So, if you live in the US, good luck on your suing spree. The court records might also be used for marketing purposes.
ich bin der musikant
mit taschenrechner in der hand
kraftwerk
Hold on to your guns, people, because when people like flatpack here get into office, you're going to need them.
Yet again, the guns equals freedom argument rears its ugly head, and yet it is still a strawman argument which adds nothing to rational debate by civilised people. Of course the Anonymous Coward here may indeed have his own private army consisting of tanks, ground troops, support services and a well-trained air force, but somehow I doubt it.
Face it gun lovers, your guns are an anachronism and an irrelevancy in the face of the Government you have. If they don't like what you're saying (and I can see why) then all the guns you have won't be able to stop them. So how do your guns make you free?
Perhaps you could engage in some oh-so freedom increasing assassination, picking off political targets you don't like? I mean, there's an obvious way of making people more free isn't there? Nothing makes people feel more free than the constant threat of armed violence, obviously.
You people need to grow up and realise that you don't live in a frontier world any more. The only things that your pointless advocacy of penis-extension weaponry serves is the high rate of violent death in America. America won't be truly free until the last gun nut is forced to give up their toys.
"The only possible explanation that doesn't make Motorola sound like evil bastards is the concept that they're simply asking for this information in an effort to be closer to their customers."
Well, that would be true if the asked. But they don't, they demand it. "give me you data or you will be out of buisness"
But otherwise i agree fully with you.
Why all this jibberish about Motorola, when everyone knows that the guys in the black helicopters are monitoring all of us anyways. After all, belly buttons are really just the scars from implanted tracking/monitoring devices anyway.
pssst... hey Carnivore: CHINA! SADDAM! NUCLEAR SECRETS! LEWINSKY!
Support a few technologists in Washington.
I just wondered why a dealer couldn't set up a "shadow" company that acts as a reseller. The dealer buys from Motorola, but sells all the product to the "shadow" company. This way all the data sent to Mot' would point to the shadow, not the real customers. As far as the real customer data, well, only the Shadow knows ... (tm).
I suppose that the dealer agreement prohibits reselling, or some such limitation. But if the shadow company were to, say, specialize in selling (barely) used radio equipment ...
Ok, I just read the thread from the last person who mentioned the Data Protection Act in the UK.
They got pretty well mobbed by a load of "We're free because if everyone didn't want this to happen, then it wouldn't. You just have a repressive government." voices.
Well, a little bit of info.
The Data Protection Act doesn't stop a company from keeping records on you. It doesn't restrict the freedom of a company any way at all.
I should know, as I run a small company, and the Data Protection Act applies to me quite heavily.
Data that I hold must be available for a customer's perusal, should they so wish to see what information I hold about them. They must be told what kind of information I hold about them, and what uses I intend to put it to.
If I abuse the data about them, they have every right to request that they be removed from my database, or I risk being taken to court for abusing their rights to privacy and use of their information.
This, then, is no Governmental heavy handedness. In nearly all cases, the Government can't step in and wield this law and wave it about in your face to stymie a company.
It's about protecting each individual, and maintaining the rights of each person.
The methods mentioned in other threads (move everyone to a different provider) are frought with problems.
I don't know offhand if the radios are compatible across brands.. If they aren't, then there's a significant writeoff from starting from scratch.
If they are, then what about the end users who are comfortable with a brand they know, and feel safe with?
Overcoming this requires a huge section of the population to interrupt their day to day workings, which are more than complex enough, and deal with these new issues too.
If all big providers played this game, then, there would be more decisions to be made than there was time for a small company to consider them properly, thus stymying the company effectively.
I'll happily agree that an awful lot of laws out there are just pure crap. They're there to make lawyers rich, and do stomp all over common sense.
However, please don't knock a common sense law that actually does a lot of good when it appears!
Now, back to work for me after that little rant.
Malk
Since in the UK the Post Office is obliged to delivery post regardless of the content then the recipient gets a nice big brick and (by the time it gets there) mouldy banana skin, both of which they have the priveledge of paying the huge excess postage for.
If you want you can enclose some helpful detail on why marketing is a Bad Thing.
Anyone have any comments? Its worked for me.
NB: the views of the poster may or may not be applicable in other countries... check with your postage organisation first.
In any case .. I don't advise doing this with items that have your name on them unless you'd like a personal response from the sender.
--- This meme is memory intensive
Yet more proof that the people at Motorola have completely lost any grounding they had in reality or common sense.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Your argument is as poor as your math. There are fewer than two million Americans in the armed "services." There are over sixty million American gun owners. Notice anything?
Yes - that lots of people want to own a weapon, but don't actually want to enter into combat.
My guns are to protect me when the government comes to take the last of my freedoms away.
It just amazes me that Americans really think their government will turn into a dictatorship, and will personally come to their citizen's fort^H^H^H^Hhouses to gun them down. I doubt this will ever happen, the government and its corporate cronies already have all the power they need. Have you personally gone out and taken pot-shots at Jack Valenti because the DMCA is oppressing your freedom of speech? How many agents of government have you killed with your freedom-weapon?
Why don't you look at the Balkans for a real dictatorship? Guns didn't work, innocent people got shot. Bombs didn't work (except for generating lots of lovely repair contracts for EU construction megacorps). Sanctions didn't work. But democracy worked. They had an election. The people voted the dictator out, they even outvoted his phony ballot papers and corrupt returning officers.
What is your idea of freedom? A repressive, Orwellian nightmare world of constant surveillance
Echelon, Carnivore. "Pot" and "Kettle" spring to mind.
and no personal rights whatsoever under a ruthless world government?
Hey! We've just got the Bill of Human Rights, we now have the right to sue anyone we want and make lawyers rich, just like the Americans!! Great! Europe is already rapidly heading in this direction, with their "Economic Union" and the "Euro"
No, I don't think the bogeyman word is "Euro" in America. I think it's still "Communism". But as for EU monetary policy, it's simply trying to build a currency and economy that's strong enough to have political clout. A bit like, say, THE ALMIGHTY BUCK. Much of the world hates America, because America thinks it runs the whole damn world, and because of its economic investment almost everywhere, it does! We resent that!
Consider how your government has brainwashed you. Here you are, telling those of us who truly believe in freedom to "give up, go with the flow, lay down your arms."
Tell it to the fucking Irish, whose bombs and killings have failed to divert the political process. We only see people being shot for being Catholic or Protestant, Loyalist or Unionist. We don't see a 'fight for freedom'. We believe in laying down our arms and taking up our pens, taking our voices to Parliament, making OURSELVES count, not our WEAPONS.
"The only possible explanation that doesn't make Motorola sound like evil bastards is the concept that they're simply asking for this information in an effort to be closer to their customers."
Well, that would be true if the asked. But they don't, they demand it. "give me you data or you will be out of buisness"
It would also make sense if they would even comment on it officialy to the press, other then putting their thumb down on their resellers and letting the story leak out that way.
I've grown sick of the world and its people's mindless games
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.-Franklin
What do they take me for? I want to build a relationship with a slim blonde, not a piece of electronics, product name, or a marketing company!
In Murphy We Turst
folks, this isn't just about consumer goods (cell phones) that motorola sells to joe q. public. this is about two-way radio systems used by public safety, military, government and commercial organizations.
I worked for a motorola two-way dealer once (disclaimer: only for a short time). there are definitely customers who would not want their purchase data shared directly with motorola. for those of you that say that the dealers and customers can just deal with someone else...it's not that easy. you may have hardware from many different companies in your PC, but a two-way radio system with 25,000 units and 40 repeaters and relays *needs* to be consistent; if you need service for a part of that system, you can't *afford* to wait for people from three different companies to show up to fix it and bicker over whose stuff went belly up. (it's bad enough having to deal with the phone company when they're involved.)
add to that, the problem that 's radios and motorola's radios may not work together (RF, yes. Trunking systems? Maybe, but probably not) so you can't just start buying from someone else. it's not like buying a new cell phone, or a new ethernet card.
and if that's the case, and you're a 1,000 unit suburban police department, who needs to talk to the 50,000 unit urban police department radio system (made by motorola), what are you going to buy?
anyway...it's not my field; just wanted to point out that there's a different issue than just what you and I use.
>market is because of their vastly superior
>products. While Nokia phones are trendy fashion
>objects, anyone who wants a darn good fuctional
>phone gets a StarTac and never looks back.
Ahem, the issue isn't mobile phones but two way radios, an entirely different thing.
By the way, Startac is just too fragile for my taste.
The only reason to have a gun is to protect oneself from incivility, and violence.
Thus, the necessity to own a gun arises from not living in a civilised place.
Excuse me while I wipe the bullshit off of my shoes.
I've grown sick of the world and its people's mindless games
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.-Franklin
nothing is going to happen to Motorola. Nothing happens to any company which violates consumer privacy rights. So they may loose some small customers, no big deal to them, they were going to loose that many anyway. There will be a lot of yelling here, but nothing is going to change except some some dealers are going to be taken to court and put out business, but that doens't matter to Motorola anyway. Heck once the "you have questions, we have useless answers" store turns over their list, we all will be known anyway since we all got our clueless cats.
A friend of mine worked for a Motorola division. He worked in a huge cubicle farm. He had a friend who worked on all the same projects in the next cubical, so they decided to remove the divider between their cubicles. It turned out that any change to the cubicle scheme had to be approved at the vice presidential level.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Now if Erickson was smart they would make sure their phones worked just fine with motorolas and then yell this news reports from the ramparts. Make a motorolasucks.org website (through a 3rd party of course.) Ect. ect ect.
Pithy, yet ultimately meaningless, phrase expressed with gusto!
Repeat after me: two-way radios. radios. radios. Where you got the idea that this somehow involves cell phones (beyond the fact that moto is also in that market) is beyond me.
The more in-depth answer is that there are both proprietary radio communications protocols as well as documented standards in both the U.S. and European markets. Standards-conformant moto radios can theoretically be replaced with equivalent Ericsson equipment (although I've never tried in practice). Even the non-documented moto protocols (at least the low-end ones, like the Talkabout radios) could probaby be reverse-engineered for interoperability by an old-school RF hacker in a day or so.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Whatever competitive advantage this might actually have, Motorola will completely and utterly screw it up. There are more phbs per ^2foot there than any two other companies combined. I can hear how it got started: "...well, if we had this data, we would actually be somewhere instead of the losers we are today look at Iridium..." The M in Motorola stands for Mediocrity
Different societies tolerate different levels of intrusion. This means not just privacy, but any kind of intrusion against the individual.
The problem is that it's not just a matter of corporation vs. individual. It's also the govt. vs individual. Individual privacy is against attack from all kinds of organized powerful entities, including BOTH the govt. and the corporation.
For instance, in Australia, mass DNA screening of an entire town was carried out to catch a criminal. This was viewed as generally acceptable (there is no bill of rights in australia). On the other hand, when Australian companies gather data, there is widespread media scrutiny and suspicion. In Australia, govt. regulation of public lives is considered acceptable (they have censors to control what people watch or read) but there's a very high level of caution regarding companies.
In the UK, there is generally a much higher rate of govt. intrusion in electronic communication, a level that would be unacceptable in the US. ISPs are also held responsible for content, even in newsgroups, after the Godfrey vs. Demon case. This means more monitoring of content, since the ISP is liable, and in general, a greater intrusion into individual communication.
In the US, govt. intrusion is generally viewed with great suspicion. The one exception is police attacks on certain sections of society (because the anti-crime sentiment is strong, so people are willing to tolerate the cops busting a few doors and shooting a few people if it's to reduce the crime rate). OTOH, corporate abuse of individual lives is considered acceptable, because people have been indoctrinated since birth that if companies do something, they should be allowed to do so since the market will regulate itself. In days past, this meant that US companies could use DDT (now banned), operate nuclear power plants more freely (now regulated), use asbestos (now banned), or sell banned chemicals like DDT to third world countries (still allowed - it's good for exports).
Generally, these things all depend on how much a society permits its individuals to be powerless against the govt. or companies. In the US, it's a difficult proposition, since companies have bought out both major candidates. But there's still a high rate of suspicion of intervention in individual privacy, which results in some degree of regulation. Contrary to what people think, even though corporations influence politicians, the vote still counts (because that's how the prez gets elected, go figure), so they still pay a lot of attention to what the public considers acceptable.
What the public considers acceptable is just a matter of indoctrination, culture, and trends. Guns are acceptable and a hot topic in the US, not even an issue in most of Europe or Australia. Police abuse is common in the US while technically illegal, whereas in EU/aust/NZ, the cops have more powers but the level of abuse is less (except against native tribes).
Communication, well...it's a whole new game, and the rules are being written. Who knows what will happen?
w/m
...although, thankfully, not in marketing. I feel that marketing and possibly corporate have really let the rest of the company down. This is exactly the kind of crap that our internal code of ethics is supposed to catch. Apparently it only applies to engineering, not to marketing, though. I am truly ashamed to be working here today. Although not ashamed enough to be non-anonymous and get fired over it :)
In response to some other comments about Moto's problems with cell phones, PowerPC chips, etc., you have to remember one thing: these are totally separate parts of the company. There really is very little connection between them, other than the way that the two-way radio division props up cellular when their profits plummet.
The post office generally just throws things that appear much too heavy in the trash without cost to the company you want to hurt. Too many people have tried that trick before.
You can get a similear effect that will go through if you have lots of papers in there, then it becomes borderline and they are likely to deliver it. Just make sure it looks on the outside like you just had a big letter to send to them.
PS, I'm not sure if you can accually attach a postage paid envelope to something else. Just stuff their envelope.
tell them about my customers Jack Meoff, Heywood Jablowme, Hugh Jorgens etc.
A dyslexic man walks into a bra.
Motorola, especially their two-way radio division, is notorious for this kind of crap. They've done stuff like this for years. They go after ham radio operators who buy their stuff on the surplus market, they go after anyone who even THINKS about using their software to program a radio without their oversight.
They have the most draconian dealer agreements in the world. I'm surprised any small dealer will sell their stuff.
It's really too bad they build such great radios, because their business practices suck.
----- Leghorn "Not responsible for program content"
Who's making strawman arguments now? My guns are to protect me when the government comes to take the last of my freedoms away.
Won't you need some anti-tank and anti-aircraft defences too? Perhaps a stealth bomber buried in the backyard.
Actually, to be honest, I'd like a gun because I'm a little skinny and get frightened by big, loud agressive males. A gun would really help.
:wq
Guns are gaurenteed by the US Constitution because they are the last line of defense against a tyrannistic government. If all other options for removing an oppressive government from power have failed, guns are left. It's sad, but true.
Incidentally this is why people worry about groups who want to ban guns, you and people like are leading yourselves down a road to tyranny.
--
RumorsDaily
While the spreading of personal information in this manner in the UK maybe questionable under The Data Protection act (not sure on that one) or even under the "privacy" element of the newly introduced Human Rights Act; where I really think Motorola would come unstuck in the UK is under The Competition Act 1998.
This law helps to protect businesses from "being the victim of others anti-competative behaviour". It also has TEETH
http://www.oft.gov.uk/html/comp-act/
I also have a vague memory that this law (or one very much like it) falls under the jurisdiction of the European Commission. I believe Motorola's threatened behaviour would also be in breach of the Treatise Of Rome too !!
I'd really like to see them try this stunt over here. They'd get their legal butts kicked!
Macka
The DUNS number mentioned in the article is very much like a SSN. It uniquely identifies a company, and its relationships - like who it is owned by. You can get very detailed reports from DUNS and credit reports with that number.
The SIC code indentifies the industry the company is in, their very lifeblood.
So the combination is very much like a SSN and blood type.
It is interesting to note that Motorola talks about what the information is going to be shared with their distributors, but none of them mentioned even getting a sales pitch on that aspect of it.
Actually, if I remember correctly, Digital DNA is Motorola's integrated component (IC's) and semiconductor products.
I don't know about e-commerce but I suspect that Motorola has been using Impact21 data to help my competitor move into my area.
The competition I speak of is Motorola's largest dealer in the west, they are very friendly with each other. Suddenly that competition wants my area and starts finding out handy facts about who buys what here, what kind of business they are and how much I've sold the equipment for. Things that make me go "hmmmmm".
It begins to stink when the salesman for Motorola's "golden boy" dealership walks into my customers office with a quote for exactly the equipment they use and their quote beats mine by a few dollars right off the bat. That wouldn't be such a suprise on the second or third visit after the competition has built a relationship with the customer and learned a few things, but to have a detailed quote right out of the shoot???
. Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
"Ken Silverman, operations manager at AR Fuels, a Brooklyn oil distributor, said he has already notified his local dealer that he will sue if information about the business is shared.
Well the only problem is now all of /. amd all of ZDNet know that Ken uses radios to dispatch trucks. Lets hope Motorola isn't reading this!
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Dealers and customers will simply vote with their dollars and Motorola will respond. Frankly, if the dealers all get pissed off and walk, but then Motorola makes three times as much selling on the 'net, then they've made a good business decision. It's up to end-users to care enough not to let that happen, as then all their competitors will see the result and follow suit.
Unfortunately, I have little doubt that consumers will either not know, not care, or both, and so Motorola's biz will likily do fine...
Please Rate my comment (and help support Fre
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
I'm tired of the constant compromise of my privacy. Unfortunately, I'm not a MotorOla user. If I was I'd sue the motherf****rs. Even though I know I'm already in thousands of databases worldwide (I have a VISA card, bank account, Safeway discount card etc.), I still will not tolerate this kind of mafia tactics. Screw them. Who the hell do they think they are. My advise to resellers of Motorola products: switch to a different brand. Even if they [Motorola] should decide to withdraw this "request", we still know what kind of business they're pushing. We don't need their "steenking" products anyways. (They're really not that great to begin with...) Personally, I'll never buy another Motorola product again. Just as with Sony, (See related Slashdot article, I will now boycott Motorola, and encourage others to do the same. Without consumers, no corperation is able to survive. We have the power to make these corperations listen. I suggest we now USE that power. Let them know, that we will NOT bend over and take this kind of crap in the tailpipe.
"In a world without fences... Who needs Gates?"
If you live in or near the West Bank in Israel, you'd better be prepared to defend yourself and your family with something more than "rational debate" right now.
And if they hadn't have had guns then they wouldn't be shooting each other quite so efficiently would they? Seems to me that this is a fairly large flaw in your argument...
Dell didn't start off as an internet seller. Dell had a dealer organization, and then started demanding customer information before providing any quotes for quantity purchases.
Then they would call the prospective purchaser, and offer the same equipment at a lower price than they offered their dealership.
The dealerships quickly got sick of this and bailed, leaving Dell to market directly, and later use the web.
I think somebody at Motorola woke up and caught a clue. The independent dealers should do the same, and bail on Motorola.
The handwriting is there on the wall, it's time to get off the boat.
********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
Now here's a clue, THIS post is off topic and/or a troll. Rate this one as such, not the previous one. And, to make it easier for budding moderators, I'm leaving my post score as +1 so it "sticks out" and BEGS to be moderated down.
Bloody wankers... :-(
A very thorough look at behind-the-scenes marketing forces.
The example here, and in most cases referenced on /., is a case of bad marketers, not of marketing. As with any discipline, including programming (all programmers are involved with DDoS attacks, right?), marketing can be used and it can be abused. Part of good marketing is making sure that the customer has a positive image of a brand and has a good experience at all levels of interaction with a company. The marketers behind this policy at Motorola simply do not understand this. The problem is not marketing, it is bad marketing.
Either 1) Lobby government to make laws (bad)
2) Vote with your money (GOOD!)
3) Encourage dealers to tell Motorola to fuck off.
Besides. If companies want demographics, they can do it in much nicer ways.
From a marketing view, as the article says, they probably want to pursue customers directly, without a retailer in the middle. This improves revenue. As for selling the list, that isn't Motorola's business, and they probably don't want to piss off the customers they are pursuing. So the customer isn't too badly off here, mostly they are screwing the retailer.
I still think it's a bad thing, but the actions that can be taken are quite different. If you use two way radios, just buy from someone else. If you don't, then you can write them letters if you are really concerned, but don't boycott them without telling them why, as most of the company probably doesn't even know about this.
If you are modding me down because you disagree with me, use the "Flamebait" category, not the "Troll" one.
They are cheaper and better, so why even bother with motorola? The dealers can sell Cobra (or any other brand) instead. Fuck motorola.
This is a geek site, and if you're a geek, you should be concerned about privacy. This is a breach thereof, as well as a brute-force corporate [A.K.A. Microsoft] tactic. Forcing a re-seller to give out confidential and personal information about their customers is wrong. If Motorola wants to know their customers, they should be satisfied with the warranty cards that some people send in, or polls etc. Perhaps product registration as a requirement. (I oppose this strongly, as well...)
Oh, and by the way, you don't really have to read Slashdot, you know.
Slashdot - Love it or leave it, you pinko punk...
First I'd like to suggest that some big motorola customers get together and visit an attorney and have them write up a contract. This contract will state that, in return for purchasing products from a Motorola dealer, the dealer agrees to hold the customer's demographic information confidential, and forbid it to be shared with any third party - specifically name Motorola, but also say any third party.
If the dealer won't sign, ask them if they carry any of Motorola's competitors' products, and buy those instead. Alternatively, shop around for Motorola dealers willing to sign.
Rememeber, your information is your information, and while there may be no law to protect you, if the dealer signs such a contract, then you have civil law to protect you.
When such a contract has been drafted, put it on a web page and distribute the URL widely so that all Motorola customers may benefit.
Secondly, keep in mind that Motorola is a huge company. They have interests around the globe. Interested in buying a Mac? Print out the ZDNet article and bring it with you to the Apple dealer. Tell them you want to look inside the case of the Mac you're considering purchasing. Tell them you'd be happy to make the purchase if the PowerPC chip was manufactured by IBM, but you won't consider purchasing a Mac containing a Motorola brand PowerPC - the chip was jointly designed by Apple, IBM and Motorola and is actually manufactured by IBM and Motorola (multiply sourced). Second sourcing means you as a consumer have a choice.
Also look around you and think about what products you use that are made by Motorola. Do you do MacOS, BeOS, or QNX development? How about embedded or game consoles? Perhaps then you use Metrowerks Codewarrior for your development system (compiles for Windows too - I vastly prefer it to Visual C++ or Borland). Metrowerks is now a Motorola subsidiary. If so, drop a line to any contacts you may have at Metrowerks, give the URL to the ZDNet article, and ask them to let the folks they know at Motorola that this practice is unacceptible.
Do you actually design embedded hardware? Consider alternatives to Motorola products - again, IBM has some altnernatives - and let your rep at Motorola know that you're not going to be needing his services anymore - and tell him why.
Some links for you:
- The Electronic Privacy Information Center
- The Center for Democracy and Technology
- The Electronic Frontier Foundation
- JunkBusters
Tilting at Windmills for a Better Tomorrow.-- Could you use my software consulting serv
On the bottom of their www page on privacy, there is an email address:
privacy@motorola.com
How about we write them as a group... and say they're full of it?
I'll be voting with my $ too ($53k last year in motorola equipment that clearly won't be repeated no matter what they do now). Motorola's CEO is (last I checked) the kid or grand kid of the founder. Someone should do some research to get his email address too.
From Motorola's Code of Conduct:
"Uncompromising integrity means staying true to what we believe. We adhere to honesty, fairness and "doing the right thing" without compromise, even when circumstances make it difficult.
Constant respect for people means we treat others with dignity, as we would like to be treated ourselves. Constant respect applies to every individual we interact with around the world.
Each of us is expected to demonstrate these key beliefs in our work as Motorolans."
Okay, so we know the big company doesn't even play by their own rules. And while it's not really effecting the those who buy cell phones and cheeze two way radios from Circuit City, it is importent to remember that if you don't nip these problems in the bud they could become your problem.
Alright, so what are we to do? Well, I think it's time to flood some e-mail in the direction of Big M. I susgest you email ethicsline@motorola.com. Be polite, point to the URL if you like, and remind motorola that while there is nothing illegal about these business practices there is also nothing ethical about them. You may also say you fear they strong arm tactics may eventually trickle down to consumer level products. Furthermore, you could say until you see a change you'll be supporting nice socialized EU companies like Nokia.
..nearly all car manufacturers (Ford, Honda, etc) use CPUs related to the 68HC711 as part of the onboard magic-make-it-go system. Car manufacturers already have lots of info on us, too.. (how often we buy, what we buy, who we are, how much we make, what our credit is like...)
..many consumer appliances use Motorla CPUs, including television remotes, toasters, microwaves, refrigerators, and iMacs. Some computers use them, too (like NeXT cubes and Amigas).
Heck, even radar detectors use Motorola CPUs. What's next? Buy our cell phone, or we'll tell the cops you own a Valentine-1???
I'd be willing to bet that 99% of people in North America own something that is made with Motorola parts, whether they know it or not. (Who made the transistors in your transistor radio? How about the 74LS47s in your clock?)
--
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
Don't give Microsoft any ideas.
Guns are also very useful for imposing an oppressive government, and you may note that all the nastiest tyrannical regimes of the last century came about with popular support, as the result of armed popular uprisings.
Gun owners are just as likely to be authoritarians as libertarians; I personally would rather my freedom was supported by something a little bit more robust than a duck hunting rifle. Like democracy
-- the most controversial site on the Web
"I don't want any information relative to anything I do shared with anyone. Our business is our business. I don't want anyone to know what equipment I use, when I use it and how I use it," said Silverman, whose company uses the radios to dispatch trucks.
Um, whoops!
___
__
Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
In the biblical sense?
----
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
This is one of the lowest! There oughta be a law!
Hey Motorola (I know you are probably reading this): Next time I am faced with deciding if I will buy your product or someone elses, you can be sure that it will now be theirs!
Your hunger for the buck should stop before you bite the had that feeds you.
I just sent the following letter to Motorola's ethics e-mail address:
6 061,2637528-2,00.html
...
Dear Sir/Madam:
I recently read an article at
http://www.zdnet.com/filters/printerfriendly/0,
concerning your demands for detailed customer information from dealers
of your 2-way radios. I find these demands extremely distasteful. They
also do not seem to mesh with your Code of Business Conduct, one facet
of which is
Constant respect for people means we treat others with dignity,
as we would like to be treated ourselves. Constant respect applies
to every individual we interact with around the world.
[ http://www.motorola.com/code/code.html para 4 ]
You also state in the same document
CUSTOMER INFORMATION
We must protect customer information that is sensitive, private
or confidential just as carefully as our own. Only those who have
a need to know should have access to confidential information.
Joint Ventures and Alliances
Motorola will strive to ally with companies that share our
commitment to ethics. We will also work to make the standards of
our joint ventures compatible with our own.
Do you not feel that your vendors should have this same right? This to
me seems the height of hypocrisy. Perhaps your ethics department is
unaware of this shameful treatment of your vendors and customers; if so,
I hope that the situation will be made right. Unfortunately, I find it
more likely that your company has disregarded it's ethics policy over
the course of the last few years in regards to gathering customer
information from vendors.
I do not appreciate this and in the future will avoid Motorola products
and those products which use Motorola parts to the best of my ability
and will encourage my friends, acquaintances, and people I meet on the
street to avoid Motorola products, including your semiconductor products,
personal communications products, and if at all possible, your broadband
communications products.
Sincerely and regretfully,
Acy Stapp
Former Customer
-- Too lazy to get a lower UID.
i live in oregon, and we have a ballot measure system that, in theory, is designed to pass laws that our legislature is too cowardly or disinterested to create. isn't it possible to write a measure that prohibits individually identifiable information from being collected on the internet? I realise that the US Congress has control over 'interstate trade' and so forth, but isn't there something that can be done on the local level? maybe passing the measure would get people to start paying attention to what's happening to their information behind the sceness.
--
share and enjoy
After a quick call to the ethics hotline I found out that after a "few" emails this morning, the issue has been sent to the legal department for review. It sounds like they might not like the threat of losing customers :).
you wouldn't find any information on the corporate website, or any other public website for that matter. this is a program for their dealer channel only.
I wonder if there are any online merchants selling Motorola equipment? I wonder how this impacts their privacy statements if they have the standard 'don't share' that many do. Is a large retailer supposed to change it to 'don't share except with Motorola'? Obviously they violate their own privacy statements if they don't. Hmm. And if they have that little TRUSTe logo and 'no share' policy. They can kiss that good-bye.
That's not how it works in the US. The vote doesn't elect a president, the Electoral College does that. A candidate can have the majority of the vote yet still lose. It has happened. Even a close election, as far as vote totals go, can be a landslide when it comes to electoral votes because the electoral vote of a state is all or nothing: the candidate gets them all or gets none.
FWIW, the electoral college doesn't have to vote the way their constituents vote: everyone in Texas could vote for, say, Nader, but the electoral college (maybe 30 people), having been bought by George W, vote instead for him. GW gets the 30, and Nader gets -0-.
Even if Nadar got 49% and GW 51%, GW would get ALL 30 electoral votes, because that's how it works; it's all or nothing. (The electoral votes per state is the same as representative and senators, as I recall, but pretty small in any case).
So, to say
(because that's how the prez gets elected, go figure) is not correct.
It seems that most of the information that Motorola was asking for was not personal data that would be subject to a privacy right. Rather it was information about businesses that bought Motorola products.
I suppose you could argue that the name, title, and (presumably) business phone number are private data, but that seems like a stretch.
If this is the right assumption, it would explain why a NY's attorney general and the FTC are not interested in this case. If personal data were involved (for example, a computer company requiring dealers to provide information about the dealer's customers without notice to the customer), the Feds (and the States) would be all over this. Look what happened to DoubleClick and Toysmart.
That said, the business practice is still disturbing. Dealers own their customer lists. Giving that asset to Motorola seems a high price to pay for staying in business. Given some of the market share numbers bandied about, I am suprised the FTC isn't investigating this on monopoly grounds.
I suppose that some end users could sue Motorola for inducing the dealers to breach a confidentiality obligation.
I agree with the need to get better information about the market, but this seems like a stupid and heavy-handed way to go about it.
Yes - that lots of people want to own a weapon, but don't actually want to enter into combat.
If the need arose, people would be willing.
It just amazes me that Americans really think their government will turn into a dictatorship, and will personally come to their citizen's fort^H^H^H^Hhouses to gun them down. I doubt this will ever happen, the government and its corporate cronies already have all the power they need.
Democracy, and our government, isn't perfect and is subject to corruption over time. While a change in government (ie revolution) may not be required now or in the near future, it doesn't mean that it will not be required EVER. Government corruption is unlikey, but possible and it is therefore our responsibility to ensure that generations to come can best protect themselves from a government that is unfavorable by the people.
What is your idea of freedom? A repressive, Orwellian nightmare world of constant surveillance Echelon, Carnivore. "Pot" and "Kettle" spring to mind.
I realize you were just putting down our government, but you also have given a good example of how democracy can't prevent the government from doing things that are not in the people's best interest.
No, I don't think the bogeyman word is "Euro" in America. I think it's still "Communism". But as for EU monetary policy, it's simply trying to build a currency and economy that's strong enough to have political clout. A bit like, say, THE ALMIGHTY BUCK. Much of the world hates America, because America thinks it runs the whole damn world, and because of its economic investment almost everywhere, it does! We resent that!
Ok, here we go.
Let me give you an argument given to me by my wife, who is Canadian. She blames America for the loss of all the hockey teams in Canada. That is just ridiculous, hockey players from Canada come to the US b/c they are paid better. The important part of this is that the PLAYERS CHOSE to come here. WTF, are we are to blame b/c of our prosperity? We are to blame for the player's lack of nationalism? That's just one example of foreign nation's citizens blaming our country for the actions of it's own citizens/government! The same applys to your comment of America owning the world. If you feel that America owns much of your country, then you have noone else but yourself to blame for it. After all, you can simply vote out the official who put all the necessary pieces in place to allow your country to be owned by the Evil America!
Get over it, please.
Why do I keep typing pythong?
...of a good number of their resellers. In fact, you have to format the file in a very specific way and submit it via their web site. (Used to be via a dialup modem and EDI software.)
..or corporations..)
Of course there are some sort of discounts for doing this, and so far it hasn't appeared to hurt the area resellers that I know of that are doing this... but it's still kinda scary.
I remember several of them asking, "What, are they going to try to steal our customers away?" They don't go into *clear* detail what is going on.
(After we nix the lawyers, the marketing folk are next in line IMHO..)
--
Don't trust your Government. (Update:
*kerchunk* *beep* "...Operator."
Remember folks the end customers in this case are commercial, government, and industrial organizations, not individual end users. These organizations place a heavy demand on follow up service, and on specific functionality of the two way products. From the article it sounds like Motorola is trying to get a much better picture of who the end customer is. These resellers are always concerned that their supplier (Motorola, Ericsson, etc) will turn around and "steal the sale". Why would the supplier do so? The supplier will get their revenue in any case. Remember, Motorola exited the direct sales for this type of business (commercial two way radio) about 10 years ago. The article ONLY refers to one particular product area, and a specific set of customers. Its a fairly small marketplace thats being looked at.
Dude, even if the chances are remote, be prepared. Sure, my OpenBSD box isn't likely to get rooted by some kiddie, but that doesn't meant that I have taken no security precautions with it. I'll make my backups, and read the logs, and keep it behind a firewall, and I probably will be wasting time and energy. But for something that matters as much as political freedoms, I really am going to tak a few more precautions. And if that means letting Bob Milita own a rifle, that's okay with me. Talking about who has the scariest government isn't the issue, it's making sure that on the off chance _my_ government gets too scary, I'll be living in a place where we can do something about that.
itachi
Okay, just to close the gaping hole in what I said, I would argue that once a government gets n scary, for some value of oppresiveness n, you have lost your chance to use the ballot to bring about change. I don't know what n is equal to. I think it varies.
The article is referring to resellers of voice radios to commercial, government and industrial organizations. THEIR INFO IS ALREADY ON DUN & BRADSTREET. This has nothing to do with your personal private info.
Using whose definition of tyranny? I would say that the Sandanistas would count, definitely. Ditto Castro and the overthrown of Batista (sp?). The Viet Cong probably count. There have been a variety of coups or armed insurrections that I can think of, but the question for most of them is the tyranny bit. I mean, Rwanda or Somalia, for instance. Whose definition? Whose judgement?
itachi
"give me you data or you will be out of business". No, its "you said you want us to help you, this is what we need. Its in the reseller agreement so we both agree to this". If they "just ask", they won't get the info at all.
Warranty cards aren't applicable for the type of customer in question. The information being asked for is hardly confidential information, its basic "who is your customer info". A reseller agreement "forces" both parties to do things, if either party doesn't want to sign, its their choice.
Motorola's business deals here are just appalling.It's just simply not right that this leading company can get away with esentailly blackmailing its dealers and resellers into handing over sensative buyer information which should be left to the buisinesses themselves. This brings new light to the "Digital DNA" system. ...And we thought M$ had backdoors to get info!
-----------------------------------------
Perversely greped and groped by PowerPenguin
What I think is most disturbing about this mess is that this amounts to extortion. Motorola supplies a lot of merchandise and people love to buy their stuff. That's a lot of power they yield, and this just shows what they're willing to do with it.
And you think Motorola's big? I'm sure you all know of the anticompetive mess that Microsoft has pulled. And what about the music companies? Do you think artists would stand for that industry's BS if they had a choice? These big companies have enough power to do what they want.
I am really torn by this issue. I like capitalism, I think if a company manages to carve themselves a significant share of the market, they probably did so by creating a product that we the consumer needed, and benefitted from, and the company deserves to reap the rewards. Even Microsoft started out by supplying IBM with what they needed to (help) start a PC revolution (I suppose IBM could have grabben an OS anywhere, but they didn't, they got it from Bill, and you have to acknowledge that IBM's creation was beneficial to the industry no matter what you think of IBM or MSoft) However, that's just how they start out.. when a corporation gets big enough, they no longer have to worry just about creating a needed and/or superior product, and they can use other tactics to maintain marketshare, tactics that aren't so helpful to the consumer.
But where is the line? how big is too big? What qualifies as a consumer unfriendly tactic? Who should decide this? Laws? Watchdog groups? I don't have these answers. But it is clear that there is a definate problem, and it scares me to think about it.
Dear Sir or Madam,
I have archived my previous letter in which I discussed the way I was advising others to avoid Motorola products here:
http://www.goingware.com/mani fes toes/motorola.html
and will continue to widely inform others of the URL widely until Motorola puts a stop to practices such as this.
Regards,
Michael D. Crawford
-- Could you use my software consulting serv
First off, let me state that I believe Motorola is morally wrong in using such heavy handed tactics to obtain customer information. Privacy, dealer circumvention, etc. are definite concerns. However, if properly applied, this could be made to work out for all. Motorola, after all, needs to know how their products are used, and what profile a typical user might have, in order not just to market the products, but to develop new ones, refine existing products, etc. This can be done by no other than the manufacturer of the product - the dealer doesn't make stuff, nor is he likely to possess the resources to effectively mine the data.
So passing on data to Motorola could in fact (as they claim) benefit all involved - the customer would have products better suited to his needs, the dealer with better products to sell and a clearer idea of who to sell them to, and Motorola making stuff that it knows people will buy. Still, how to address privacy and direct internet sales?
Simple. To better understand customers, Motorola needn't know their names. It should be content with unique pseudonyms known only to the dealer and the customer. They then suggest products to the dealer for particular pseudonyms, and the dealer takes these to the requisite customer. A re-intermediation of sorts, if you will.
Of course, this still leaves us with the problem of matching up the psudonym with say, D&B data, but that is another matter entirely...
You don't seem to get it; Motorola has these dealers between the conceptual "rock and a hard place". Scylla and Charybdis. And so on.
;), where a Giant offers a character two choices, to drink from one of two glasses full of unidentified liquid. Only, the thing is, no matter which glass the character drinks from, its contents kill him gruesomly and inevitably. One character got past this dilemma by attacking the Giant and tearing his eye out.
It reminds me of a scene in the novel "Ender's Game" (great great story
This is what it's like for the radio dealers. Their customers intend to sue them blind if they give up that information, information which Motorola could *sell to their competitors*, or just use to get them in an even worse deadlock. The dealers don't WANT to give up the info, because some of them have consciences as well and know that it's unethical. One the other hand, the dealers can refuse and lose their Motorola dealerships, and a large chunk of their sales, since as a poster above wisely pointed out, things like Police and Fire Departments need consistent equipment, typically all from the same manufacturer, and mission-critical Motorola equipment can't just be chucked out the window overnight.
So the dealers are, to put it bluntly, screwed no matter WHAT they do. Either they lose their business or they alienate their customers and THEN lose their business by slow strangulation, Motorola doesn't care which. Once they have the dealerships out of the way, their internet marketing will have free reign. And that's what this is all about, IMHO.
You say that they are "trying to understand who the end customers are"? I'm sorry, but you shouldn't believe everything you read or see. Motorola could care less about those customers (else why would they be trying to rape that information away from the dealers?), they just want the information for their OWN ends.
Companies with monopolistic tendencies have ALWAYS loved to tell the lie that if the monopoly gets bigger, savings will be passed on to the consumer. And everyone who's ever believed it has always ended up in the same situation: under that monopoly's control, directly or indirectly. Very simply, Monopoly = bad, from the consumer's point of view. Have you ever tried to buy a Microsoft product or get through to tech support? The bigger a company gets, the higher they can raise their prices, and the less customer support they offer. Anything else is just more smokescreen.
I say, the Giant's Drink is a sucker's game. If you take either of its choices, you're sunk. My advice is to go for the eye.
Kasreyn
"Wow, maybe I'll get an 'informative' tag this time"
Kasreyn: Cheerfully playing the part of Devil's Advocate to hairtrigger
You could always disable the "Your Rights Online" section in the preferences, if you have an account.
And a good sized mailbox. Take the junk mail and dump it back into the corner mailbox. Probably 95%+ of the time, it is metered mail, charged against their account every time it is sent (I think. Can't swear to it.), and never postmarked. With stamped mail, the USPS puts a big red stamp across the postage stamp so that it can't be used again. Junk mail is not postmarked. I've had the same piece of shit in my mailbox dozens of times. Wouldn't it be wonderful if everyone did this? If they really are charged every time their crap is delivered, it shouldn't take long to remail them out of business.
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
The Net makes "voting with your feet" much more effective. Send the Motorola "story" to 6 friends, asking them to boycott Motorola products until the company abandons this practice and asking each person to relay the message to six more friends. Shouldn't take long.