Slashdot Mirror


RadioShack Puts Customer Data Up For Sale In Bankruptcy Auction

itwbennett writes For years, RadioShack made a habit of collecting customers' contact information at checkout. Now, the bankrupt retailer is putting that data on the auction block. A list of RadioShack assets for sale includes more than 65 million customer names and physical addresses, and 13 million email addresses. Bloomberg reports that the asset sale may include phone numbers and information on shopping habits as well. New York's Attorney General says his office will take 'appropriate action' if the data is handed over.

3 of 262 comments (clear)

  1. 80's data by jfdavis668 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Don't worry, it's all from the 1980's.

  2. Re:Hmmm by BronsCon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ever since the checker at Fry's caught that one of my items (the smallest yet most expensive item on my ticket) was not in my bag, I'm more than happy to let them check. It's not always a loss-prevention, treat you like a criminal, measure. In fact, having talked to the checkers quite a bit when the store is slow, I've learned that they catch people leaving without what they paid for much more often than the other way round. At least at Fry's, it truly is a customer service initiative. And yes, cashiers do face consequences for not making sure the customer leaves their register with all of their purchases.

    --
    APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
  3. That is not "Stand Your Ground" by drnb · · Score: 5, Informative

    Many states, including my home state of WV, have "stand your ground" laws where the bar to use deadly force is very low.

    My understanding of the concept of "Stand Your Ground" is that it does not define the conditions upon which deadly force may be used. Different concepts, for example the "Castle Doctrine", define such conditions. Under the "Castle Doctrine" a person is by law considered to be in danger of death or severe bodily injury if a stranger forces his way into their home. That forcible entry into the home enables the use of deadly force. What "Stand Your Ground" adds to such concepts is whether the person is obligated to flee. Does the person enabled to use deadly force under the "Castle Doctrine" have to attempt to flee if possible to do so. "Stand Your Ground" merely say that they have no such obligation to flee.

    Be aware that "Stand Your Ground" is being grossly misrepresented in the media. Partly through the normal day to day ignorance of the media (*) and partly through politics.

    (*) Consider the media's abysmal coverage and discussion of anything computer related. What makes you think they do any better on any other subject matter?