RFID Coming To A Cell Phone Near You

Roland Piquepaille writes "In "RFID Goes Mobile", Red Herring reports that Nokia has quietly launched last month the first RFID-enabled cell phone. The Mobile RFID Kit will be available later this year and only for the 5140 model. This accessory allows the user to easily launch services and conveniently access phone functions simply by touching the phone to an RFID tag. The phone accesses the RFID tag data when an RFID reader emits a short-range radio signal that powers a microchip on the tag, allowing the ID information and other stored data to be read. Nokia doesn't intend to sell this kit to ordinary consumers like you and me. Instead, the RFID kit is designed to extend the mobility of workforce already on the move, such as security guards or maintenance people. This overview contains other details and references about the kit."

Comments

Re:Sheesh.

[Patrik_AKA_RedX]

Where would you stick those batteries ?

In your mouth ofcourse (be carefull not to get them wet). But you'll still have your right to free speech, well, for as far as you can give speeches with a mouth full of batteries.

Re:Consumer Apps

[David Hume]

The problem is, that bar-code scanner thingy (Cuecat) wasn't a one-way data feed, and neither might this be.

With Cuecat, every time you swiped a barcode, it logged what you were doing and passed that information to the parent marketing firm.

[snip]

I'd guess the RFID thing might work the same way - use the RFID kit to read retail RFIDs and I wouldn't be surprised if it means there's a log somewhere that'll upload to Nokia/whomever.
That would be a nice saleable resource for Nokia - I mean, people pay $000's for email lists of dubious provenance, what about a swipe-history of your RFID activity?

There is an additional obvious danger. That Nokia (or whomever uses the technology) will legally legitamize the practice by having the consumer sign a contract containing a provision allowing Nokia (or whomever uses the technology) to upload, use, etc. the information. Although consumers in general never read such contracts, often don't understand them when they do, and don't reject the deal when they do understand the contract (particularly when they can save money), the contract would probably be held to be valid and binding in the U.S.

The obvious solution is to legally forbid such practices. I suspect that in the face of efforts to outlaw the practice, corporations might support a legislative compromise allowing the practice, but requiring the type of "prominent" disclosure (e.g., bold face type of a minimum size, in a separate paragraph, on the front of the page, using clear language, etc.) required by various consumer credit laws. Not that such disclosures would as a practical matter make any difference.

I futher predict that when the issue again rears its ugly head, the Slashdot crowd will be divided between swashbuckling (and sometimes Ayn Rand worshiping) freedom of contract libertarians and privacy / consumer protection (and sometimes nanny-state) liberals. :)