![]() ![]() This one was no longer the “surrender your rights” notice that had remained on screen the entire day prior, but instead a notice regarding a class action lawsuit against Vizio, informing me that I may be part of the class, and could submit a claim at a specific URL. The next day, turning on my TV again, I was faced with a different message. Setup complete, I proceeded to continue with my plan of listening to some good music while working from home, to worry over the Vizio TV another day. I’m not an Apple fanboy, but of the monolithic tech companies we have today, they consistently seem to be the least data-hungry, and the most proactively responsible with disclosing data use, and in giving the consumer options with regards to sharing such data. “To the people at OATH, this is literally all you had to do to not create an adversarial relationship with your customers. Within minutes I was faced with a very different kind of prompt: Fortunately I had an old AppleTV laying around, and I turned that on and got it set up. This kind of anti-consumer activity by big companies rather obviously angers me. It is stating very explicitly that continuing to use their services is accepting their terms, and surrendering your rights. Note the distinct lack of any kind of “opt out” option on that message. The only reason to demand such is you intend to abuse user privacy. ![]() “Hey when a person turns on their TV, they shouldn’t be forced to surrender their rights to use the device they paid for. My response on Twitter was none too writes: Instead of a simple experience of turning on, tuning in, and rocking out, I was instead presented with this message: One day last week, I turned my TV on to use the Pandora app, intending to listen to some music while working on my computer. Why do I care about this? I own a Vizio TV. A Random Privacy Abuse Appears!īut I should back up a bit. Note, of course, that none of the above discusses whether or not what Vizio did was wrong. Now, I’m not a lawyer, so I have no idea whether what they did “violated privacy laws and consumer-protection laws.” Given that the United States doesn’t really have well-established data privacy laws, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Vizio did nothing that technically breaks the law how do you break a law that doesn’t exist? The lawsuit also alleges VIZIO did this without the consent or knowledge of persons who bought these TVs. “ The lawsuit alleges VIZIO violated privacy laws and consumer-protection laws by collecting sensitive information about what was displayed on certain VIZIO Smart TVs during the time period above for sale to advertisers. As a result, there is a class action lawsuit against Vizio: 30-2021-01226723.įor SFC: Richard Sanders of Aaron & Sanders, Sa'id Vakili of Vakili & Leus.Vizio Privacy Violations, or Why Class Actions are Bullshitīetween February 2014 and February 2017, Vizio collected information about customer viewing habits through their Vizio Smart TVs, and sold that information, all without clearly disclosing the nature of their collection or disclosure to their paying customers. Vizio Inc, Superior Court of the State of California, Orange County, No. The case is Software Freedom Conservancy Inc v. The group asked the court for an order requiring Vizio to share the code, and didn't request money damages.Īn order for Vizio to share the source code would "benefit the public and further the goals of software freedom" by enabling developers to better protect user data, improve accessibility, and preserve "useful but obsolete features," SFC said in the complaint. In exchange, the recipients must allow their licensees" to do the same.īut Vizio has "taken full advantage of the rights granted by these agreements but refuses to let others enjoy the same rights," the complaint said. "Recipients of the licensed software are entitled to use, examine, modify, adapt, and improve the software however they see fit. "At their heart is a simple bargain," SFC said. The software covered by the licenses is meant to be publicly accessible and modifiable, letting developers be "confident that their contributions can be used by all and will lead to further improvements." According to the complaint, Vizio incorporated software covered by two General Public License agreements into its SmartCast platform for streaming content from services like Apple's AirPlay and Google's Chromecast to its TVs, but didn't make its source code publicly available. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |