Slashdot Mirror
German Court Rejects Apple's Privacy Policy
redletterdave writes "A German court rejected eight out of 15 provisions in Apple's general privacy policy and terms of data use on Tuesday, claiming that the practices of the Cupertino, Calif. company deviate too much from German laws (Google translation of German original). According to German law, recognized consumer groups can sue companies over illegal terms and conditions. Apple asks for 'global consent' to use customer data on its website, but German law insists that clients know specific details about what their data will be used for and why."
It must be hard to ensure that every jurisdiction on earth will be happy with everything that you do
This sig is intentionally blank
With organisations like the StaSi and GeStaPo in more recent German history, the protection of the individual's privacy is a serious issue in Germany.
Now and then politicians try to create another surveillance state for example to fight "child pornography", but fortunately they haven't succeeded to enact their crazy laws so far.
Why should it be on the people? If the company doesn't want to follow their laws, they shouldn't sell their stuff in that country. By choosing to operate in Germany, they have to follow German laws for products sold in that country. Don't like it, decide not to sell there.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
The injustice here isn't to Apple, it's to other potential customers. One group of people is needlessly imposing their views of privacy on another group; instead of saying "I don't like Apple's privacy terms, so I don't use them", they say "I don't like Apple's privacy terms, so I am going to prevent you from using them as well".
Wrong. German law says that what Apple is doing is illegal, so they have to stop or they are going to be fined. And please read again what this issue is about. Apple can very well collect personal data and provide services that use them, they just have to inform customers what they are collecting and for what purpose, so the customers can make an informed decision. Their current privacy policy basically says: "We collect whatever data we want, we do whatever we want with it and reserve the right to share it with anybody". That is simply not allowed and has to change, so please enlighten us where you see any injustice.
It should be "on the people" because some people may not have a problem with policies and may want to do business with Apple anyway.
Absolutely. Everyone should be free to decide which bit of the law of the land they want to follow.
I, for example, can't see why we are not allowed to burn glibertarians in the public parks.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
And then governments get the notion to sue, which of course raises messy issues of jurisdiction, discovery, &c.
1. So Apple pays a fine to Germany.
2. Germany bails out Greece.
3. Euro crisis solved. Profit!!!
Screw you, Underpants Gnomes!
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
It should be "on the people" because some people may not have a problem with policies and may want to do business with Apple anyway.
What's your point?
The basis of the complaint was, that Apple is not transparent about what it does with the data collected.
If they are transparent about it and tell the users what exactly thy are going to do with the data BEFORE any data is collected, they're basically fine.
And then the users who are fine with can use those services.
But Apple, like many other companies, wants to have the right to do anything without telling what they do.
The European data protection laws lay the groundwork for users to be able to decide freely what services to use and what not.
The basis for a free decision is INFORMATION.
You need to forgive him. He is American, and over there laws only apply to regular people. Not to companies, and especially not to the rich (and Apple is both of those).
Companies can ignore the law all they want, and if someone disagrees, he can stop buying their product.
The whole concept of the law applying equally to everybody is foreign to them. Not that it always work that way in Europe, but it works often enough that we are used to the concept, and don't start arguing against it when it does work.
But Apple, like many other companies, wants to have the right to do anything without telling what they do.
Hate to be a defender of Apple, but you just took shit out of your butt and added it to the argument.
The issue is that they arent telling what they do, not that they "want to have the right to do anything." These things are not mutual, so you don't get to argue as if they were.
Is it really so hard to stick to the substance here? Seriously.. it isn't... you could bash apple for a week without having to pull shit out of your ass, so why are you pulling shit out of your ass? Every time you reach for your ass, you look like you've got nothing.
"His name was James Damore."
However, you fuckers need to get bent if you think it's actually possible to comply with those laws at a technical level.
The iTunes store is very good at identifying and limiting access to country specific content, IMHO it is not a technical problem to comply to country specific terms and conditions.
It would be interesting to know whether there is anyone who holds both of the following positions.
1. The German finding is unfair to Apple because Apple, quite reasonably, shouldn't be required to follow the law of every land in which it does business..
2. Criticising Apple for caving in to the censorship requirements of the Chinese government is unfair to Apple because Apple, quite reasonably, should be required to follow the law of every land in which it does business.
Best wishes,
Bob