Verizon Wants To Share Your Personal Information

hyades1 writes "Gizmodo reports that Verizon is sending out notification letters infested with virtually-indecipherable legalese. In their sneaky, underhanded way, they're informing you that you have 45 days to opt out of their plan to share your personal data with 'affiliates, agents and parent companies.' That data can include, but isn't limited to, 'services purchased (including specific calls you make and receive), billing info, technical info and location info.' If you view your statement on-line, you won't even get the letter. You'll have to access your account and view your messages. However, Read Write Web says the link provided there, called the 'Customer Proprietary Network Information Notice,' was listed as 'not available.' No doubt Verizon would like to reassure you that everyone they're going to hand your personal data over to will have your best interests at heart."

Comments

boy am I glad

[peragrin]

that i have AT&T and they won't ever try to abuse me.

Excuse me now I have to go reset my sarcasm meter. for some reason it gets pegged all the time now.

Re:boy am I glad

[ScrewMaster]

i have AT&T and they won't ever try to abuse me.

Ha ... I have Sprint and was going to say the same thing.

Bloodsuckers, all of them.

Re:boy am I glad

[davester666]

The summary is blatantly wrong.

Verizon will NOT just hand over your information to other companies.

I am 100% sure that Verizon will demand a bunch of money before these companies get to see any of your personal, private information. Once the companies have made the payment, then they can do whatever they want with your information. And if they make their regular monthly payments, they get access to updated information from Verizon.

Re:boy am I glad

[sdnoob]

About a month ago, I got a similar letter from AT&T describing how I could opt out ...

US Cellular did the same thing last year... IIRC, it was right after some sort of legislation or rules change that allowed them to share the data.

Opting out was painless, just had to call a number and it was automated... *however* people should have to opt *IN* not opt out.

Re:boy am I glad

[h4rm0ny]

Bullshit about obligations to shareholders. The shareholders invest their money of their own free will. If they think they've made a bad bargain then they shouldn't have invested or should sell their shares. And it stops there. If someone gives me £500, I'm not obliged to go out and kill their rich grandparent for them. Why not? Because it's against the law and they didn't give me the money on the expectation that I would go out and indulge in unethical behaviour on their part and if they did then more fool them.

Companies don't exist as indivisible entities. Somewhere there are people saying "lets violate people's privacy" and they should be personally held accountable because they are personally responsible.

Re:boy am I glad

[AmigaMMC]

I had Verizon for 5 years and boy, am I happy that I dropped them like hot potatoes. I even had to fight them for 9 months for getting my due rebate. Moreover, I found out that they had me on collection for years because the idiot that I returned the phone to the day after purchasing it (it malfunctioned) forgot to do their paperwork. I had to get the FTC involved and finally they stopped asking for money. What's worse was that they don't communicate among departments otherwise they would have seen that I had an active line with payments made regularly.

Re:boy am I glad

[AliasMarlowe]

Opting out was painless, just had to call a number and it was automated... *however* people should have to opt *IN* not opt out.

But then they'd have to offer you something in return, to entice you to opt in. The underhanded way they're doing it, it costs them nothing. Most likely, their income from selling customer information won't be reduced unless quite a lot of subscribers opt out.

Re:boy am I glad

[narcberry]

If congress didn't lock these companies in place with huge piles of money, we might have some entrepreneurs entering the space with words like, "customer", "service", and "helpful" in their dictionary.

Anyhow, I hope this presents an opportunity to end my contract with Verizon, I missed the last one they never mailed me.

Re:boy am I glad

[h4rm0ny]

The purpose of the legal entity known as a corporation is to make a company an indivisible entity and shield it's officers and shareholders from responsibility for the actions of the officers and shareholders.

That certainly is the purpose. And a child can say that his friends told him to do something wrong. In either case the purpose is to pretend the responsibility lies elsewhere. That doesn't mean it does.

Law, especially the law around very big businesses, is not always the same as what is right and wrong. We shouldn't allow the passing of a law to change our principles. Laws can be changed.

Re:boy am I glad

[Kozz]

"We don't care. We're the phone company. We don't have to."

http://snltranscripts.jt.org/76/76aphonecompany.phtml

Re:boy am I glad

[narcberry]

In the meantime, here's how to opt-out (taken from the mouth of FredicvsMaximvs from the article comments)

- Sign in to the Verizon website.
- On the red bar near the top, hover over "My Verizon." Click on "My Profile." (Don't go over to the sub-menu that pops up.)
- In the second section down, under Phone Controls, there's a link to "View/Edit Privacy (CPNI) Settings." Click on that.
- Voila! Click on the button that says "Don't share my CPNI." Remember to hit the save button before you leave.

Re:boy am I glad

[AHuxley]

Mr. Pimp says
All fees where clearly listed.
She let you connect to all 3 ports and you dont have a rash. Thats better than Microsoft.
She did not report your pillow talk to the feds, thats better than Verizon.

Re:boy am I glad

[cbeaudry]

I think the best option is to call them. Ask to speak to a supervisor.

Tell them over the phone, you opt OUT and you want them to change any records necessary to make sure you are opted out.

Ask them if they are NOT recording this they SHOULD be recording as you are recording it as well.

Tell them if they do not opt you out immediately that you will sue them in court and it wont be pretty.

Then... hope to god they make a mistake :)

Im from Canada and Im usually not a litigious person. But these corporate bloodsucking companies need to get their ass handed to them.

Hey Verizon :)

[L4t3r4lu5]

I'm posting here that I'm going to eat all of your staff's pets.

You 15 minutes to reply to this post, or you agree that Bruno the Poodle is my main course.

Frogs in boiling water

[sentientbeing]

Look, I know the UK gets slammed regularly here on Slashdot for CCTV privacy issues and government spying, but at least we have a halfway decent Data Protection Act with teeth. A company pulling this kind of shit wouldnt get 2 steps in the UK. Doesnt the US have something similar to deter blatant abuses like this?

Re:Frogs in boiling water

[Ontheotherhand]

I think the subtle irony of your post may be lost on the less British. my personal favourite is the local council that used anti terror legislation to spy on a family who were applying for a school place. Thank goodness commercial organisations cant protect us in this way - yet.

Re:Frogs in boiling water

[ScrewMaster]

Look, I know the UK gets slammed regularly here on Slashdot for CCTV privacy issues and government spying, but at least we have a halfway decent Data Protection Act with teeth. A company pulling this kind of shit wouldnt get 2 steps in the UK. Doesnt the US have something similar to deter blatant abuses like this?

Yes, indeed ... we have Congress ...

Re:Frogs in boiling water

[EddyPearson]

You mean a company like Phorm , who have been getting backing from both BT (THE telco out here) and the Gov't despite the exclusively bad press?

Re:Frogs in boiling water

[Wrath0fb0b]

We have contracts. I am a Verizon customer and I read this story and called up and now, I'm opted out (I offered to opt in for $5/month off my bill, about what I think that's worth, they declined). In the end-game, if VZ wouldn't agree to let me opt out, I'd consider other service providers, compare all my options, and pick the one I liked the most.

For the masses that don't care to opt-out, they don't care! Giving out personal information is not an injury to people that don't care. I know it's impossible for /.ers to imagine that other people might have more a different set of priorities than they do, but it's a fact that different people care about different sets of things. Even people that care about the same set of things assign different weights and will come up with different tradeoffs. What's nice about a system of voluntary associations is that those sets of priorities can be efficiently mapped into different contract terms instead of everyone getting a one-sized-fits-all solution.

I really cannot understand why some people believe that they have the right to dictate the terms under which someone sells them a service. If you went into the grocery store and saw a 6-pack of apples being sold for $1, would you demand (citing some clearly inalienable right) that they sell you a 5-pack of apples for $.80? If you don't want apples on the terms that the store is selling them, buy them from a different store. If no store has terms you approve of, then you have to admit the fact that no other human being will voluntarily give you his apples under those terms. Either change your terms, or start rationalizing to yourself your right to seize those apples from him involuntarily.

Re:Frogs in boiling water

[DeadChobi]

The problem is that the stance you take ignores the whole concept of barter which has been part of human existence since a guy first decided to sell apples. Only with the advent of mass marketing has it been acceptable for a company to entirely dictate the terms of the apple sale. Before, I could walk into a store and ask them if they'll sell me that package of apples for $.80, and it would be totally okay. There are markets in other countries where this is still considered acceptable, and where merchants price items specifically so that they can haggle down to a reasonable price. The fact that we accept without question that companies just sell us service for a flat rate means that they don't have to compete as directly with each other.

Furthermore, we don't believe in our unalienable right to those apples. We believe that we have the right to negotiate the price of those apples or seek apples elsewhere. Reasonable people realise that it's unreasonable to expect anyone to part with anything without a fair exchange. We would only quibble over what constitutes fairness. Maybe you're the one being irrational? Isn't it a bit irrational to expect people not to negotiate for anything at all?

Case in point, I asked a bank teller if one of their fees was reasonable, and she promptly removed it after thinking about it herself. It's okay to want to negotiate.

Re:Frogs in boiling water

[FatdogHaiku]

Yes, indeed ... we have Congress ...

Thanks, my nose needed rinsed out with milk, and it has been awhile since I wiped off the keyboard and LCD...

Re:Frogs in boiling water

[Wowsers]

If the UK's Data Protection Act had any teeth at all, they would have ruled the IP packet inspecting / changing Phorm system illegal under existing laws, and not have the situation that the Phorm company is going around trying to suppress knowledge of their system to subscribers of the three scumbag internet providers that will roll out this system (BT, Virgin Media, TalkTalk).

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/UK_media_suppressed_Phorm_survey_and_article%2C_2009

Re:Frogs in boiling water

[sentientbeing]

Verizon: "But Mr Dent, the privacy opt-out contract has been available in the local telecom office for the last nine months."

Dent: "Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything."

Verizon: "But the contract was on display ..."

Dent: "On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."

Verizon: "That's the display department."

Dent: "With a flashlight."

Verizon: "Ah, well the lights had probably gone."

Dent: "So had the stairs."

Verizon: "But look, you found the privacy notice didn't you?"

Dent: "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."

Re:Frogs in boiling water

[AmigaMMC]

> Our government used to stop these things, but they got bought out by the corporations about 20 years ago.

Let's call a duck a duck. It was thanks to Ronald Reagan, the greatest almighty president, that corporations got more and more power. For those who were too young to know, or forgot, banks also had a limit to how much interest they could charge on a credit card, but Reagan decided it wasn't fair and made them free to charge whatever they wanted. Good Morning 29% APR. Thanks George W. Reagan!

Re:Frogs in boiling water

[soren202]

Did you even read the summary of the article? Verizon will be selling things like billing info, technical info and location info, among other things.

Name ONE person that enjoys junk mail and unsolicited phone calls during supper about getting your windshield repaired, or refinancing their credit card debt, or unneeded car insurance.

Yours is an indefensible position. Nobody wants what Verizon is trying to do with their personal info, and every rational person knows that.

Although it's true that we can't dictate the exact cost of a service, having personal information sold to other companies at no benefit to the consumer on an opt out basis is wrong, regardless of the context.

If it's a way to have your bills reduced or if it's on an opt in rather than opt out basis, then maybe I'd be more sympathetic to your stance, but, as it stands, Verizon is selling private information to other companies with no benefit to the end consumer. There is no way, regardless of your convoluted view of the system, that such a situation could ever be considered fair or right.

Re:Frogs in boiling water

[cyn1c77]

> Our government used to stop these things, but they got bought out by the corporations about 20 years ago.

Let's call a duck a duck. It was thanks to Ronald Reagan, the greatest almighty president, that corporations got more and more power. For those who were too young to know, or forgot, banks also had a limit to how much interest they could charge on a credit card, but Reagan decided it wasn't fair and made them free to charge whatever they wanted. Good Morning 29% APR. Thanks George W. Reagan!

I'm not going to disagree with you about who started chipping away at the public good in favor of corporate greed. Sadly though, I think that both major parties are guilty. Priority goes to getting yourself re-elected, which involves bringing the most pork into your district and making the corporate lobbyists happy so that they don't overthrow you on the next election.

When advertising and lobbyists started having more effect on elections than the actual facts on the ground, the general public lost out.

Now it's just like herding sheep.

Re:Frogs in boiling water

[rnelsonee]

Yeah, but name one person who enjoys paying more for services than their neighbor.

Verizon will be selling personal information for *money*, and this influx of capital will mean that customers won't have to be 100% responsible for Verizon's monthly operating budget, upgrade projects, or anything else that the company spends money on.

Every successful company (and let's face it, Verizon is one of them) spends its money wisely. It's not like the money Verizon is getting for this is going to the Buy-the-CEO-a-Mercedes fund -- it will go into the budget just as all the customer payments do.

If Verizon doesn't sell your info (which most customers don't value much anyway), then either service will degrade, prices will go up, or Verizon will not be able to offer new products. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.

Oligarchy Only Slightly Better Than Monopoly

[dprovine]

While people will complain about this now, and talk about switching to Comcast or whoever, what will happen next is that Comcast &c. will do the same thing, and there'll be noplace left to switch to.

Since it's unlikely there will ever be any sort of sufficient regulation of this behaviour by the government, the obvious solution is for everybody to use VOIP and run TOR. But that's unlikely too.

Re:Oligarchy Only Slightly Better Than Monopoly

[TheGratefulNet]

I don't carry a cellphone anymore. I hate being 'on call' like that when I'm away.

one problem, though. have you notice that payphones are almost non-existant now? they are almost impossible to find.

Standard Fare for CC Companies

[SaxIndustries]

CC companies do this kinda stuff all the time. You get a letter of an upcoming policy change, and you throw it out not even bothering to read it, since your options are usually A) Agree to the new terms, or B) Pay off and close your account.

I guess what I'm saying is, I've lost all faith in large companies to do the right thing. After I saw my tax dollars pay CEOs large bonuses, I just gave up. Game's over man.

Of course, this happens right as people start forgetting about how much Verizon sucks at math.

It possibly suggests

[mysidia]

That Verizon perhaps has already been doing this information sharing. They just want to stop getting penalized for various marketing activities they undertake.

And court rulings that affirm the new regulations requiring opt-in consent.

So the new regulations are finally making them take notice and be more forthcoming about when they share proprietary information??

Verizon might be on the hot seat right now, but, I won't be surprised if notices like Verizon's or similar agreements start being seen from other carriers.

Re:Which Verizon?

[gEvil (beta)]

Replying to myself. Looks like it is Verizon Wireless. But it also looks like it's fairly easy to opt out of. You can either do it through your settings on the Verizon Wireless website, or via phone at 1-800-333-9956.

I found it:

[nukeade]

If you are a Verizon Wireless customer like me, the number to call to opt out is given in the actual legal document, here:

http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/globalText?contentType=Legal%20Notice&textId=181

It takes about two minutes.

~Ben

its not 'share' its SELL

[TheGratefulNet]

dammit.

file 'sharing' is wrong. or so we're told.

but DATA sharing, if done by multi million corps - that's ok. yeah....

its not sharing, its SELLING.

orwell was right - you can control thoughts via language. give words an incorrect meaning or redefine them and you're halfway there.

similarly, copying bits is not THEFT but copyright violation. again, manipulating our words to make things not quite what they really are.

Direct link to opt out

[fructose]

I had to go through 3 websites/blogs before I got the direct link. So if you have Verizon and want to opt out directly, here you go.

https://ebillpay.verizonwireless.com/vzw/accountholder/profile/CPNISettings.action

Needs to stop, and it's not just Verizon

[Anonymous Coward]

Several years ago, my local PBS station was begging for donations. I was about to call in and donate $50 when they said they would give you a 1-year subscription to Fast Company magazine if you dontated $60, so that's what I did. A few days later, I got a postcard in the mail thanking me for my donation and saying I would receive my subscription shortly, but my name was misspelled in a unique way. I never received a single issue of the magazine, but I got several solicitations from various charities with the same misspelling.

A message to all corporations and non-profits: If someone gives you money for a donation, service, or product, be thankful for it and treat them with an ounce of respect instead of turning around and screwing them for a few extra pennies by selling their personal info.

P.S. I never gave another penny to PBS again.

This isn't new

[Mugsy69]

The court case resulting from the 2007 FCC regs requiring consumers to be able to opt to not have their information shared was finally decided on 2/19. That's what caused this notice to be sent. For more information check out this link to the EPIC website: http://epic.org/privacy/cpni/. It includes links to opt out for both Verizon and SBC.

But they told Congress...

[icebike]

So they apparently lied to congress:
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/ISPs-Try-To-Prevent-New-Opt-In-Only-Privacy-Law-97991

Verizon statement before Congress:

Verizon believes that before a company captures certain Internet-usage data for targeted or customized advertising purposes, it should obtain meaningful, affirmative consent from consumers." To get that meaningful consent, Tauke said, requires a) explaining to consumers exactly what kind of data are being collected and for what; b) treating a failure to consent as meaning no collection of data for "online behavioral marketing"; and c) consumers' ability to easily opt out if they initially agree but change their minds.

I shocked. Shocked! I tell you...

opt out

[suraklin]

From the comments at Gizmodo there was a post that explained how to opt out from your web account

Sign in to the Verizon website.
- On the red bar near the top, hover over "My Verizon." Click on "My Profile." (Don't go over to the sub-menu that pops up.)
- In the second section down, under Phone Controls, there's a link to "View/Edit Privacy (CPNI) Settings." Click on that.
- Voila! Click on the button that says "Don't share my CPNI." Remember to hit the save button before you leave.

Make it cost Verizon to do this...

[m6ack]

Follow these instructions:

1) Call Verizon.
2) Have the representative explain "CPNI."
3) Ask a couple of questions.
4) Ask the representative to OPT-OUT of all your phones.

You have just cost Verizon Wireless about $20.00 for that call.

I dunno

[Anonymous Coward]

I have prepaid service through T-Mobile, and I never have to worry about this sort of thing.

Why?

Because all they have on me is a name and a birth date. No address. No social security number. No drivers license number. No credit card number. Nothing. In fact, when I set up the phone they didn't ask for any proof of the validity of the birth date, nor if the name was even mine.

I can buy more minutes at any of their locations, paying cash, to ensure total anonymity.

It costs ten cents a minute. And ten cents a text too. But since I am not prone to lengthy or frequent phone conversations, I still wind up paying significantly less than I would for the cheapest monthly rate of any carrier.

I recommend it.

That was not easy

[dcooper_db9]

First, when I logged in I browsed to the "Message Center". Most of the contract documents, including the "Customer Proprietary Network Information Notice" were unavailable. The reason they gave was:

Your Customer Proprietary Network Information Notice is available to view online if executed within the last 6 months.

After about 5 minutes of browsing I found how to get Verizon to stop sharing my personal calling information. The steps to change the setting are as follows:

1. Login to the account.
2. Click on "My Profile"
3. Scroll down to the "Phone Controls" section.
4. Click on "View/Edit Privacy(CPNI) Settings".
5. The privacy settings give you the option of changing permissions for a individual phone numbers or all phone numbers. Change the value from the default "OK to Share My CPNI" to "Don't Share My CPNI"