Court Rules Against Privacy in Data Collection Case

[Lunentucker]

Check out T-Mobile’s TOS changes…
google “T-Mobile hate speech”

Interesting that a corporation or company now thinks they can pass laws and apply fines and penalties with no trial.
I think any company has the right to refuse to do business with anyone they choose, but I do not think they have legal authority to impose fines.
NFL, NBA, etc. do so, but the fines are levied against people who are under contract as employees.
T-Mobile is grossly overstepping.

Sponsored

 

[whysoserious]

Interesting that a corporation or company now thinks they can pass laws and apply fines and penalties with no trial.
I think any company has the right to refuse to do business with anyone they choose, but I do not think they have legal authority to impose fines.
NFL, NBA, etc. do so, but the fines are levied against people who are under contract as employees.
T-Mobile is grossly overstepping.

Doesn't seem as nefarious to the consumer once one starts digging into it, since it only applies to non-consumers.

 

[TimC]

Doesn't seem as nefarious to the consumer once one starts digging into it, since it only applies to non-consumers.

Beginning on January 1, 2024, they will be fining users who commit perceived violations on their bandwidth. S.H.A.F.T. is an acronym that stands for Sex, Hate, Alcohol, Firearms, and Tobacco.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

The problem is that to SUE anyone, you must prove harm has come to you by a result of their actions. If that part was removed, then anyone could sue anyone for things like "he annoys me".
There must be proof of harm to prevent millions of frivolous suits over things that don't do anything to harm anyone in any way.
Not saying there's nothing wrong with what's going on, just saying - the law needs to be there as is, and the people suing need to find some other recourse.
Otherwise, every single person here could sue the maker of your phone and much of the software on it, you can sue Fakebook, instacrap, any social mediocre, even Google.

 

[whysoserious]

Beginning on January 1, 2024, they will be fining users who commit perceived violations on their bandwidth. S.H.A.F.T. is an acronym that stands for Sex, Hate, Alcohol, Firearms, and Tobacco.

No. It applies to non-consumer users; messaging businesses. And "bandwidth" is Bandwidth.com, a company that provides voice, messaging and emergency services to enterprise customers (messaging providers). You know, the ones that keep sending you text messages about the package that you never ordered, that is waiting at the delivery hub and you only need to log into some shady website and give them all your info... or that your warranty is about to expire on your Gladiator...

New A2P, non-consumer non-compliance fees beginning January 1 – Bandwidth Support Center

 

[Hootbro]

Check out T-Mobile’s TOS changes…
google “T-Mobile hate speech”

I Googled and found nothing direct from T-Mobile on this. Just a bunch of other websites all parroting each other with some chatter it only applies to third party messaging apps that use T-Mobile service and not individual customers with direct messaging service.

 

[Minty JL]

The problem is that to SUE anyone, you must prove harm has come to you by a result of their actions. If that part was removed, then anyone could sue anyone for things like "he annoys me".
There must be proof of harm to prevent millions of frivolous suits over things that don't do anything to harm anyone in any way.
Not saying there's nothing wrong with what's going on, just saying - the law needs to be there as is, and the people suing need to find some other recourse.
Otherwise, every single person here could sue the maker of your phone and much of the software on it, you can sue Fakebook, instacrap, any social mediocre, even Google.

Only problem there Bill is, I did not sign a consent monitoring of my data. GO ahead and read below; this falls clearly under the 4th Amendment...the same protection that provides protection for phone calls, email traffic or any other type of communications.

I'm a Cyber Security Policy guy and have dealt with this for almost 2 decades with DoD under the cyber, intelligences and law enforcement umbrellas. This is a slippery slope until it hits the Supreme Courts.

18 U.S. Code § 3121 - General prohibition on pen register and trap and trace device use; exception

• U.S. Code
• Notes

(a)In General.—
Except as provided in this section, no person may install or use a pen register or a trap and trace device without first obtaining a court order under section 3123 of this title or under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) or an order from a foreign government that is subject to an executive agreement that the Attorney General has determined and certified to Congress satisfies section 2523.
(b)Exception.—The prohibition of subsection (a) does not apply with respect to the use of a pen register or a trap and trace device by a provider of electronic or wire communication service (NOTE: this would require a court order. Just like in many states, recording a phone call w/o consent of BOTH parties would not make the discovery admissible in the court of law)

(1)relating to the operation, maintenance, and testing of a wire or electronic communication service or to the protection of the rights or property of such provider, or to the protection of users of that service from abuse of service or unlawful use of service; or

(2)to record the fact that a wire or electronic communication was initiated or completed in order to protect such provider, another provider furnishing service toward the completion of the wire communication, or a user of that service, from fraudulent, unlawful or abusive use of service; or

(3) where the consent of the user of that service has been obtained.

This is a pending shitshow and battle in court.

 

[TimC]

I Googled and found nothing direct from T-Mobile on this. Just a bunch of other websites all parroting each other with some chatter it only applies to third party messaging apps that use T-Mobile service and not individual customers with direct messaging service.

You are correct. This was added by Tmobile to their website a couple hours ago:
HeavenM3 hours ago

Hello all. These changes only apply to third-party messaging vendors that send commercial mass messaging campaigns for other businesses. The vendors will be fined if the content they are sending does not meet the standards in our code of conduct, which is in place to protect consumers from illegal or illicit content and aligns to federal and state laws.

 

[whysoserious]

Only problem there Bill is, I did not sign a consent monitoring of my data. GO ahead and read below; this falls clearly under the 4th Amendment...the same protection that provides protection for phone calls, email traffic or any other type of communications.

I'm a Cyber Security Policy guy and have dealt with this for almost 2 decades with DoD under the cyber, intelligences and law enforcement umbrellas. This is a slippery slope until it hits the Supreme Courts.

18 U.S. Code § 3121 - General prohibition on pen register and trap and trace device use; exception

• U.S. Code
• Notes

(a)In General.—
Except as provided in this section, no person may install or use a pen register or a trap and trace device without first obtaining a court order under section 3123 of this title or under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) or an order from a foreign government that is subject to an executive agreement that the Attorney General has determined and certified to Congress satisfies section 2523.
(b)Exception.—The prohibition of subsection (a) does not apply with respect to the use of a pen register or a trap and trace device by a provider of electronic or wire communication service (NOTE: this would require a court order. Just like in many states, recording a phone call w/o consent of BOTH parties would not make the discovery admissible in the court of law)

(1)relating to the operation, maintenance, and testing of a wire or electronic communication service or to the protection of the rights or property of such provider, or to the protection of users of that service from abuse of service or unlawful use of service; or

(2)to record the fact that a wire or electronic communication was initiated or completed in order to protect such provider, another provider furnishing service toward the completion of the wire communication, or a user of that service, from fraudulent, unlawful or abusive use of service; or

(3) where the consent of the user of that service has been obtained.

This is a pending shitshow and battle in court.

The only problem with all of this, is the Fourth amendment doesn't apply. The Fourth amendment only applies to the government.

 

[Lunentucker]

The only problem with all of this, is the Fourth amendment doesn't apply. The Fourth amendment only applies to the government.

Per the Twitter files, where private business ends and gov begins is getting very blurry.

 

[whysoserious]

Per the Twitter files, where private business ends and gov begins is getting very blurry.

This is true.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Like I said - I'm not implying there's nothing "wrong with" what's going on, just that the courts often rightly dismiss cases because of a lack of standing or harm, or suing for the wrong thing.
You need to be specific, and be directly involved.
DoJ could take it up and apply proper rules/laws and succeed, (just for generalized example)

The only problem with all of this, is the Fourth amendment doesn't apply. The Fourth amendment only applies to the government.

Yeah.
Could be that government requests/demands/used information, then it can be applied, but if it's used for marketing, research and so on, then it doesn't apply.

Almost everything gathered these days is all about money - marketing, selling to others, selling info so you can be hit with targeted ads.

Examples of such things are those stupid games I keep seeing advertised on TV - "download now for free" or "play now for free".
You load that crap game on your phone and it's amazing how much is known about you and your personality in how long, how often, or even just how you play a game. (not to mention other information gathered)
People load those stupid bingo and slots games on their phone, get addicted, oh, but it's FREE - yeah, like the writer does that out of the goodness of his heart, he loves to give away free software, and there's no charges involved in anything connected with the game at all....... you may not pay cash to download that game, but they are getting their money for sure - out of your psychological analysis and more.
I cringe when I see my wife wanting to download yet another game and so I keep making comments any time I see those ads hoping she'll take the hint.

I hope anyone complaining about the car companies can say they have completely agreed and consented to everything Google, FB and others, including the games and apps on your phone, gather and share about you. If I look at your phone, it will be an old brick or flip phone with no smarts, right?

 

[whysoserious]

Like I said - I'm not implying there's nothing "wrong with" what's going on, just that the courts often rightly dismiss cases because of a lack of standing or harm, or suing for the wrong thing.
You need to be specific, and be directly involved.
DoJ could take it up and apply proper rules/laws and succeed, (just for generalized example)



Yeah.
Could be that government requests/demands/used information, then it can be applied, but if it's used for marketing, research and so on, then it doesn't apply.

Almost everything gathered these days is all about money - marketing, selling to others, selling info so you can be hit with targeted ads.

Examples of such things are those stupid games I keep seeing advertised on TV - "download now for free" or "play now for free".
You load that crap game on your phone and it's amazing how much is known about you and your personality in how long, how often, or even just how you play a game. (not to mention other information gathered)
People load those stupid bingo and slots games on their phone, get addicted, oh, but it's FREE - yeah, like the writer does that out of the goodness of his heart, he loves to give away free software, and there's no charges involved in anything connected with the game at all....... you may not pay cash to download that game, but they are getting their money for sure - out of your psychological analysis and more.
I cringe when I see my wife wanting to download yet another game and so I keep making comments any time I see those ads hoping she'll take the hint.

I hope anyone complaining about the car companies can say they have completely agreed and consented to everything Google, FB and others, including the games and apps on your phone, gather and share about you. If I look at your phone, it will be an old brick or flip phone with no smarts, right?

My phone company says I agree to all terms of service as soon as I open the box.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

My phone company says I agree to all terms of service as soon as I open the box.

Either that or don't open the box and use the phone. Pretty simple.
I love it when 2 years later you get a revised terms message.
If you don't agree to the revision, I guess you stop using the phone or whatever it is.

 

[whysoserious]

Either that or don't open the box and use the phone. Pretty simple.
I love it when 2 years later you get a revised terms message.
If you don't agree to the revision, I guess you stop using the phone or whatever it is.

Yeah. This is my point. The not so fine print explains exactly when you gave/give consent. Once you agree to give consent, there's not much you can do unless "they" don't come through on their end. Then it's boils down to, is it worth it to sue...

That and the shitty info coming out of today's media and the lack of effort on their part.

I guess I wasn't done with my rant today.

Sponsored