EFF Hits AT&T With Lawsuit Over Sale Of User Location Data
from the ill-communication dept
We've noted a few times now that while Facebook gets a lot of justified heat for its privacy scandals, the stuff going on in the cellular data and app market in regards to location data makes many of Facebook's privacy issues seem like a grade-school picnic. That's something that was pretty well highlighted by a wave of massive scandals showing how your daily location data has long been collected by cellular data companies, then sold to a laundry list of dubious individuals and organizations. Outfits that have repeatedly failed to prevent this data from being abused by everyone from law enforcement to stalkers.
The Ajit Pai FCC has yet to lift a finger or so much as scold the companies for their cavalier treatment of private user data. And while cellular giants like AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, and T-Mobile say they've stopped the practice in light of these scandals, nobody has actually bothered to confirm this fact. Given the billions to be made, it's certainly possible these companies may have just made a few modest changes to what's collected, who they sell this data to, and what they call this collection, but are still engaged in monetizing your daily location habits in some fashion.
Enter the EFF, who this week filed a new class action lawsuit against AT&T (pdf). The suit seeks an injunction to ensure that AT&T can no longer collect and sell this data. The class action represents several California AT&T users who say they were never informed, nor gave consent, for their location data to be used in this fashion:
"Defendants’ practices allow Plaintiffs and other AT&T customers to be tracked and targeted by unknown third parties without their knowledge. AT&T leverages the technology embedded within a customer’s phone and its own network infrastructure to locate its customers without any indication that AT&T is tracking them in order to sell their precise location to third parties for non-911 purposes. Indeed, AT&T’s practices were only publicly exposed after an FBI investigation revealed that a sheriff in Missouri had used carrier location data to stalk a Circuit Court Judge and fellow law enforcement officers without their knowledge or consent and without any legal authority to do so. This highly sensitive data has also been used to harass AT&T customers and bypass the rights afforded by the Fourth Amendment."
The lawsuit also demands that AT&T delete the oceans of data that the carrier has collected and sold over the last decade (a bit tricky given the number of companies this data has long been shared with). It also alleges that AT&T violated the Federal Communications Act by not protecting location data, and California's Unfair Competition Law and the Consumers Legal Remedies Act by misleading consumers as to the sale of this data. The EFF also states that both the cellular carriers and proxy aggregator companies violated the California Constitutional Right to Privacy.
In a statement to Motherboard, AT&T unsurprisingly promised to fight the lawsuit, and again insisted it had already ceased selling location data to third-party aggregators:
"While we haven’t seen this complaint, based on our understanding of what it alleges we will fight it. Location-based services like roadside assistance, fraud protection, and medical device alerts have clear and even life-saving benefits. We only share location data with customer consent. We stopped sharing location data with aggregators after reports of misuse."
Having covered AT&T for the better part of several decades, I can promise you that AT&T's not going to give up this multi-billion dollar market without some form of shenanigans, and that an objective third-party audit confirming AT&T's claims will be essential in putting these scandals to rest.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: ajit pai, bounty hunters, fcc, location data, oversight, privacy
Companies: at&t, eff
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
easy to stop
My phone is always off unless I need to make a phone call.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: easy to stop
My ears are always closed, unless I was to talk at someone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: easy to stop
But what if you get lost and need driving directions back to your cave?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: easy to stop
Indeed, it's easy to see why cars were a niche toy for the rich before smartphones were developed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why just ATT? Why not Google, Facebook? Similar invasions.
Google and other corporations fund EFF is why.
EFF / Techdirt always attack ATT, never Google.
EFF has no standing, and there's TOS contract. Won't go forward. Could be show trial, you never know what EFF is trying to establish, except that it's in corporate interests, not The Public's.
IF did, it'd be applicable to EVERY corporation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why just ATT? Why not Google, Facebook? Similar invasions.
Lazy trolling is lazy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why just Corporations?
IF did, it'd be applicable to EVERY corporation.
Why just corporations? Why not Intellectual Property? You can't love copyright and hate corporations, silly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why just ATT? Why not Google, Facebook? Similar invasions.
Hey, I expect high quality trolling, this will never pass muster
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
We're suing the rich just like you wanted.
I wish I could say this apoplectic reaction of yours was surprising, but it's not. It's really not.
You do know you need to come up for air every so often, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why just ATT? Why not Google, Facebook? Similar invasions.
EFF has an ongoing FTC complaint against Google.
https://www.eff.org/document/ftc-complaint-google-education
Techdirt has regularly called out Google. A few examples:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190208/23501441564/google-caves-russian-censorship.sht ml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150325/05504930423/googles-ridiculous-adsense-morality-police -strike-again.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160610/15124434685/google-comes-down-wrong-s ide-tpp.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180915/13340840647/googles-chinese-search-engine-w ill-censor-results-provide-govt-approved-pollution-data.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2018 0906/17033940594/google-moderation-team-decides-my-piece-about-impossible-nature-content-moderation- is-dangerous-derogatory.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180801/11195740347/disappointing-g oogle-makes-plan-to-return-to-china-with-censored-search-engine.shtml
What color is the sky in your delusional world?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I hope the lawsuit works. I don't have much faith in any positive outcome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I too have the same hopes and I also have little faith that AT&T will come out smelling like roses because of 2 things:
1) The government is the largest buyer of this data,
2) Smith vs. Maryland
[ link to this | view in chronology ]