Slashdot Mirror
Declining LG's New Ad-friendly Privacy Policy Removes Features From Smart TVs
BUL2294 (1081735) writes "Techdirt and Consumerist posted articles about a user in the UK who, after a firmware update to his 2-year old LG Smart TV, declined their new Privacy Policy, only to find that most Internet-connected features (e.g. BBC iPlayer, Skype) of the TV now no longer work. From the Techdirt article: 'Does a manufacturer have the right to "brick" certain integral services just because the end user doesn't feel comfortable sharing a bunch of info with LG and other, unnamed third parties? LG certainly feels it has the right to do this. In fact, it makes no secret of this in its long Privacy Policy — a document that spends more time discussing the lack thereof, rather than privacy itself. The opening paragraph makes this perfectly clear.' To add, even declining the policy still results in non-specified information being sent to LG.
LG's policy of spying on the viewing habits of customers, along with sending filenames of videos stored on USB devices connected to TVs, was previously discussed on Slashdot."
Return the TV for a full refund. Under UK law you cannot impose conditions after the point of sale.
It looks like people are going to need 3 VLANs soon... One for WiFi, one for computers with private information and a 3rd with no external access except to addresses specifically allowed.
Does a manufacturer have the right to "brick" certain integral services just because the end user doesn't feel comfortable sharing a bunch of info with LG and other, unnamed third parties?
Of course they don't.
I am sure that just in 3-4 years, after a lawsuit, affected customers will be able to get a $7.50 credit good towards purchase of a new LG TV.
It's essentially an addendum to the Terms of Use. You don't agree to the ToU you don't get to use whatever it is that's covered by them.
Wait, I remember now. A long long ago, in the before-time, there was a manufacturer named "LG." They "competed" with Samsung and Sony. But then the rains came, and their factories slowed, and then finally ground to a stop. The old books told of it with their ink-words. And some elders say you can still hear their slogans at night--and that they might even still be around--hiding in the woods, foraging for scraps, surviving as best they can.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
For a sec I misread the headline to mean LG's sales are going down.
Shit like this is exactly why, so long as they're available, I will always opt for a 'dumb display' rather than a 'smart tv.'
Just give me a decent size screen with a good resolution, refresh rate, and a handful of various input types.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
No LG TVs in the future for any of my family and also will advise everyone I know to avoid them.
Good job LG!
The primary purpose of an internet connected TV is to generate ad revenue and marketing data about you -- or at least in my cynical view it is.
Basically they've said "if you don't consent to give us this data, we're taking away features". Probably because they can't (or won't) make the services work without it, and it's just easier to cut you off.
Connected devices have always been a huge privacy hole, and an opportunity to have someone continue to make money off you after they've sold you the TV.
It's also why my last TV wasn't a "smart" TV. My TV receives inputs from sources, but otherwise is essentially just a monitor with speakers.
I view this as more or less a predictable outcome of smart TVs, because companies view them as something you're using under license, and will only give you these services if they're getting what they want in return.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
No. Not in UK law, I'm pretty sure, though IANAL.
The Data Protection Act (DPA) means you have to be able to opt out of this kind of intrusive data harvesting and if the disabling of advertised functionality isn't covered by the Sale of Goods Act, it would seem that the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations would apply. The DPA applies to your relationship with the data processor (LG) while the functionality of the TV is the responsibility of the retailer.
The correct remedy would be to return the TV to the retailer and demand a refund or a "repair" and to go to the small claims court if they refuse. LG won't be happy when retailers start pushing back.
customers can upgrade to a version compatible with LG's now 'dumb' televisions. this new firmware stores and receives digital media, imports users music, can be viewed in multiple rooms, and wont cripple your cat if you dont forward a list of your favourite shows to them.
Good people go to bed earlier.
I won't be buying anything marked LG for quite some time; I had one of their phones about ten years ago. Buggiest piece of shit I ever saw, made Windows 95 look good by comparison. The screen would often turn upside down, backwards, all white, all black, do all sorts of strange things. Thinking "factory defect" I sent it back, and the replacement was even worse. So I'm going to have to have a whole lot of people I trust telling me how well built their LG is before I buy anything from them. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
As to their privacy policy, it's pretty obvious they stupidly and arrogantly hold their customers in contempt.
That said, I don't want a "smart TV" at all. I'll stick with my old kubuntu computer I have plugged into my old TV's S-Video and the stereo with the big speakers, and when the TV finally dies I'll try to find one without a built-in computer, just because it makes vile shit like this possible.
Free Martian Whores!
Does a manufacturer have the right to "brick" certain integral services just because the end user doesn't feel comfortable sharing a bunch of info with LG and other, unnamed third parties?
If by "right" you mean "legal right", then yes. Next question.
to break feature the preexisted the new firmware update should not be allowed. Maybe a fine off 200 dollars per TV they disabled.
They should put the policy up front, and if people decline they just don't get any new features, just bug(manufacture defects) fixes.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I bought the Playstation 3 because of the ability to run other OSs. I liked my LG TVs because they gave me a DB-9 serial connection. I'm just old, I suppose. I still prefer openness.
Yep, I never spell check.
More incorrect spellings can be found he
I was glad to grab my LG TV - because it was the last one at Best Buy that wasn't a "smart" TV, no internet connectivity at all. Just a monitor.
I really hate my $129 media player that adds 20 new for-pay services every time it updates....also LG, but I am so getting rid of it when I pull the $ together for a little computer I'll build on FLOSS from scratch, and that'll be the only thing with any smarts in my media life. Not a privacy fanatic, but it all just makes me uncomfortable and suspicious.
It's a marketing testing bed set into the consumer wild to retrieve marketing information.
It rubs the lotion on its skin. It does this whenever it is told.
-Jame "Buffalo Bill" Gumb
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Why do people spend a lot of money on a smart TV, when they will stop software updates after 3-5 years? Then,, you are left with zero-day exploits in firmware. If you are not connected to the internet, you have no need to worry, but why would you buy a smart TV and have no internet access?
Probably because a LOT of people are full of outrage, lately. There's a lot of bullshit going on that average individuals feel that they have absolutely no control over, and it's true. They are outraged for a good reason. Unfortunately, internet outrage is like pissing in the wind, it's not very effective and can get messy very quickly.
-- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
When you buy hardware as a service, I guess you should expect that your hardware could fail if the service goes away for whatever reason. The problem is, the hardware isn't advertised as "working until we brick it, which may be sooner than you think". The more this happens, the more consumers will demand a firmer guarantee. Or balk at "smart" stuff altogether. Or at least expensive "smart" stuff.
My Mom had a "Memory Frame" that used a 3rd party service to display pictures from Flickr, facebook, etc. Actually, I guess it would be a "4th party" since this was an online intermediary between the frame and the social sites. The fine print on the box implied those features would only work as long as the service existed, but to the casual reader that seemed to imply that if, e.g., facebook disappeared, then so would the pics. Well sure, you think, can't see your facebook stuff if facebook goes away. Fair enough. The intermediary service was only disclosed in the fine print of the "agreement" in the user manual sealed in the box. Users complaining on the Toshiba forums were advised that the company had a right to shut it down at any time: "just look at the fine print as you'll see we're right!"
So I'm resistant to getting a smart TV, or a smart door lock or a smart thermostat, and not just for security reasons. When you buy a product like that in the "durable goods" category, you expect it to have a working lifespan worthy of being called a durable good. Not to have to call the HVAC guy in the middle of the night in sometime January because Google discontinues Nest support and your thermostat is now just a piece of decor.
I am not a crackpot.
Most consumer routers have a simple blacklist for ip's per pc ip. Simply block their addresses. Google them or run a wireshark on an isolated hub+pc and make note.
I have and LG TV and the new eula needs someone to go after it. It even sends audio recording if you use the mic to their servers.
You could agree and then record/watch lots of Teletubbies or Barney Miller reruns while you aren't home. That will shew their data and maybe they will eventually give up.
Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
There is no rational reason why software should be different from just about every other good that is for sale.
Unlike physical goods, works of authorship in digital form need to be copied into RAM in order to be used, bringing in copyright law. They also often need to be decrypted in order to be used, bringing in anticircumvention law.
Ah, good, someone pointed this out already. Of course... you got down-modded because you gave like ZERO useful information, so here's some elaboration:
Sony upgraded the PS3 software and removed the capability to dual-boot into Linux (the "OtherOS" feature). There was a class action lawsuit that was dismissed apparently because the plaintiffs didn't do a good job showing actual damage.
I remember some good analysis of the issue at the time. One analysis concluded that the PS3 owners had the right to reject the upgrade, and that the system itself could function as normal, but the ongoing use of the Sony servers represented a "continuing relationship" whereby the company did have the right to change the agreement and the users could either accept the changes or stop using the service entirely. The "service" was free, or paid monthly, and differentiated from the "hardware" which performed precisely as it was sold _if you didn't upgrade the firmware_.
Of course this varied from country to country, but I know of no country where Sony was held liable (someone should correct me -- I could easily have missed one).
I'm sure there was more nuance, but I'm paraphrasing something I read long ago. Anyway, the same logic may or may not apply here... did the LG TV advertise these features? Could the streaming "features" be considered a subscription based service, rather than tied to the hardware advertising? LG can argue that every online service faces some time-dependant obsolescence and change; they may end up being in the clear.
I was planning on buying one eventually, but I don't care about active 3D so LG was the only manufacturer. Since I can't touch a LG product any more, that means I'll stick with 2D TVs.
Or can you buy a dumb 3D TV anywhere? I really don't need the smart features to slow me down. I have a multipurpose external player for that.
I apologize for the lack of a signature.
I beleive we used to call these 'Telescreens,' citizen.
It's kinda hard to have any sympathy when only an idiot connects these 'smart' consumer devices to the internet in the first place. These devices do not have any functionality that I can't already get simply using a Roku or AppleTV or Airplay or Chromecast.
I have a bunch of these... VCRs, Receivers (for the integrated Pandora), etc. I leave them all disconnected from the internet, and so should everyone.
Having just one media device be connected to the internet is kinda like picking your poison, but at least you have a choice. And something like a Roku or an AppleTV is going to be far, *far* more secure than the crap you find in VCRs and SmartTVs and other devices of that ilk.
-Matt
I never had a beef with LG before.
Now I know I never will. I won't buy any of their connected gadgets. Bad fucking attitude towards consumers.
The big issue is that almost all new Blu-Ray discs required a firmware update to play. I bought my PS3 when there were less than 100 Blu-Ray discs. How could I know that in 3 years I would have a choice between features A & B (movies and games) or C (linux)? I didn't pay for one or the other, I paid for both.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
A TV that's just a TV:
http://www.seiki.com/
buy 'em here:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb...
Robert Heron reviews:
http://www.heronfidelity.com/b...
No smart anything. Just 1080p or 2196p, various sizes. Good prices. Good picture. No camera. No mic. No spyware. No need to hook it to the internet. A TV, not a computer, at least not the kind of computer the others want you to have. A 4K 30fps 39 inch display/TV for $499? Bit more for more screen space. Why not? Good enough for movies.
LG lost me as a customer when they decided that their need for a shiny corporate tower is more important than preserving an historical and natural treasure*. Shit like this just makes me feel even better about ditching them. *http://www.protectthepalisades.org/parisi_cho_petition
to not allow networking of various devices. Obviously it would be better if nearly all corporations weren't inherently evil, but since they are the next best thing is to just refuse to play their games outright.
Some U.S. courts have narrowed the scope of 17 USC 117(a), which is the statute you're referring to. For example, only "the owner of a copy" may perform the copying, which in practice means only the device's owner may turn the device on. And that's without all the "licensed not sold" mentality that pervades the U.S. market. See for example MAI v. Peak and the bnetd case.
http://xkcd.com/501/
Why do you need your TV to be internet-capable in the first place?
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
That depends on how long the TV's warranty is. They could just stop providing service to out-of-warranty TVs, just as GameSpy has terminated matchmaking on out-of-warranty video games.