Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AT&T, Verizon To Require Opt-In For User Tracking

Posted by kdawson on from the about-thirteen-years-late dept.

ehaggis writes "The Washington Post reports that AT&T and Verizon have pledged not to track customers' internet behavior unless given explicit, opt-in permission. The two companies made this commitment in a Congressional hearing. A Verizon vice president is quoted: 'Verizon believes that before a company captures certain Internet-usage data... it should obtain meaningful, affirmative consent from consumers.' The article also mentions a survey quoted by a congressman indicating that '72 percent of Americans worry their online activities are being tracked by companies.'"

10 of 59 comments (clear)

  1. Why? by thatskinnyguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe I'm paranoid, but how can user tracking ever be a good thing?

    --
    The game.
    1. Re:Why? by zappepcs · · Score: 5, Interesting

      User tracking can't be good. The information gleaned from 15 million users can be. Imagine if you could see every search for political terms from anywhere. Those Google trends charts start to be more meaningful than they already are. Perhaps a researcher might want to know what level of exposure there is to cellular radiation among pre-teens? There are thousands of statistics that might probably be useful if everyone allowed tracking. Nobody wants big brother following them around town, or listening to their conversations. The dangers are imminent, and the idea that a health care provider might in the future refuse treatment of a skin tumor on your cheek because of recorded cellular usage is frighteningly real.

      The desire of big brother to want to be able to track anyone anytime is also a great danger. The bad guys will always thwart such efforts and only the innocent will be harmed.

      --
      Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
  2. Buried in page 15 of the EULA? by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If I'm to go by what other companies think it's a clearly affirmative accepting a contract, it'll probably go like this: somewhere in the fine print of their contract, or maybe in an EULA on their router/modem config page, will be something like "I agree to be tracked, and the company can do whatever it wishes with my data." And if you don't agree, then you can't use their service. Bonus points if:

    A) you only find that out after you bougt the service and,

    B) they're the only choice you have.

    Hey, it worked for software EULAs, didn't it?

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Buried in page 15 of the EULA? by digitalchinky · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Or maybe, just maybe, these companies are fed up with 3 letter agencies poking their noses around and this is a way to 'stick it to the man'

      Perhaps they will be able to hold up their hands and say "We got nothing, sorry"

      Nobody does 'opt-in' these days, very probably there is a little more to this story.

    2. Re:Buried in page 15 of the EULA? by pha7boy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      that would not really be "opt in" it would be more like "force in" - I assume it will be one of those mildly worded pop-ups that most people will hit yes/no on without actually reading it. Those paying attention will be able to keep themselves out of it, but then again, it's not the "geek" the marketers are after - it's the housewife/grandma/teen that is the big prize.

      --
      -- All this knowledge is giving me a raging brainer.
  3. Let me guess... by Shajenko42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The "opt-in" will be part of the agreement to get service in the first place, thereby adhering to the letter of this promise, but not the spirit.

  4. Define "meaningful" opt-in by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Will they really lay it all out for the customer: "We want to spy on you. Is that cool?" Or will they try and hide it in section 10.123.31 of the TOS: "By breathing, you hereby give ATT perpetual, non-revocable permission to spy on you."

  5. Nobody said it will be good for YOU by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, nobody said it will be good for _you_. You're just supposed to believe that it'll be good for the economy -- in the same way, say, telemarketing calls or companies selling your private data are -- and saves the company some money, and _of_ _course_ they'll pass the savings on to you, the consumer.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  6. Opting-Out Mr. Anderson? by digitaldc · · Score: 5, Funny

    So, tell me Mr. Anderson, why didn't YOU opt-in?

    I mean, if you aren't doing anything wrong, you might as well, right?

    My colleagues believe that I am wasting my time with you, but I believe you wish to do the right thing. We're willing to wipe the slate clean, give you a fresh start.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  7. The only reason they decided this..... by bleh-of-the-huns · · Score: 3, Insightful

    voluntarily, is because they are trying to head off government regulation of private data.

    But people are right, it will probably be buried inside the TOS, which makes for an interesting dilemma, since requiring explicit permission to use the data would allow you to say yes or no without affecting your service, but if you say no to the TOS because the clause is in there, you can be denied service....

    --
    I came, I conquered, I coredumped