Slashdot Mirror
Virtual Assistants Such As Amazon's Echo Break US Child Privacy Law, Experts Say (theguardian.com)
Mark Harris, reporting for The Guardian: An investigation by the Guardian has found that despite Amazon marketing the Echo to families with young children, the device is likely to contravene the US Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), set up to regulate the collection and use of personal information from anyone younger than 13. Along with Google, Apple and others promoting voice-activated artificial intelligence systems to young children, the company could now face multimillion-dollar fines. "This is part of the initial wave of marketing to children using the internet of things," says Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, a privacy advocacy group that helped write the law. "It is exactly why the law was enacted in the first place, to protect young people from pervasive data collection."
All data is valuable to these companies.
Combine one of these devices with Microsoft's pervy chat bot!
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
...and the rest of us aren't?
This signature can save you $400 on your car insurance!
How is this not simply the parents' choice? Kids aren't buying Echo units and installing/using them. It's parents. If they make the conscious decision to introduce such a device into their homes, and decide to use them, that's all there is to it. They have chosen to be a household that uses this device and its associated services. If they don't like the implications of that, they can simply choose not to put the device in a space where kids will interact with it, or choose not to use it at all.
People who are trying to make it more complicated than that are just looking for ways to get government more involved in what goes on inside the home.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
As a parent, are you not old enough (informed enough should be the metric, but our society is bewildered about age) to decide if your kids can use the device?
Oh, right, parenting. Not allowed to do that any longer, my bad. "It takes a village" (to pillage your informed personal and consensual choices, not to mention parenting.) Of course you're not old enough. We'll decide that for you. Move along. Move along.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Thankfully you were born an adult and your parents didnt benefit from any of these rules.
Do not take the Guardian and the Center for Digital Democracy at their word.
Read the guidance contained in the second link of the summary. Specifically, read: "Who is covered by COPPA" here.
This is a general audience device and service, full stop. I don't have one, so I cannot say whether they even permit the associated account to be set up by a child 13 or under, or allow multiple user accounts with accounts for children 13 or under, but if I were to purchase one, set it up with my Amazon (or Google, for their device) account, and allow everyone in the house to use the device under that account, there would be no violation of COPPA.
The targeting and "actual knowledge" requirements cannot be deemed fulfilled simply because an advertisement shows a child and the service knows that children might be using the service.
FTA:
No, that is a general audience that happens to include children. Targeting children requires a service aspect specifically directed to children.
Notice that the one thing the article does not say is that the FTC has opened an investigation. Merely that the CDD "[is] going to recommend to the FTC that they give industry guidance of how the internet of things and COPPA should work together."
Very little to see here, then...
That's why I don't own these devices....and with Siri....I disable it from listening.
And while it was a bit of a fun novelty when I fiirst got a phone with Siri on it...I rarely if ever find myself using it, I don't see much use in it.....I may just disable it entirely.
Especially while out in public, I don't want to be shouting into my phone annoying folks around me, nor them listening in on my searches, etc.....I just type it in the old fashioned way.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
You mean to tell me just adding boilerplate text asserting you don't "knowingly" collect data from children does not provide immunity?
"It is exactly why the law was enacted in the first place, to protect young people from pervasive data collection."
Why just kids? Why not just make a law that protects everyone from pervasive data collection?
"Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
I don't use the Google version, or the Hound voice search either. But now that you mention having other people hear your voice search, I can't even think of a time I have ever heard or seen someone using any of these voice features of a phone. Besides playing with it when it first came out that is.
-- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
They keep trying to say that these things are virtual assistants but all they seem to be is a front-end for a standard search engine.
I am probably doing something wrong...
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
Why aren't we up in arms about all the data collection happening to any kid using a computer in the last 16 years? I don't think a cookie warning is an effective measure against that, either, but the warning means it's obvious the tracking does happen. If we can tell so much about an "anonymous" user from their google searches, can't we gather an awful lot of knowledge about a child without even knowing it's a child in the first place?
Maybe put the onus on advertisers and such to make sure it's not a child well before they even start tracking things. (Yes, I'm aware that would be very hindering to a lot of businesses, Google included. I'm still serious.)
This forum Sig is licensed under the LGPL.