7 ms·

T-Mobile claimed selling location data without consent is legal–judges disagree

391 points by Bender 1y ago

sour-taste 1y ago
Look forward to the supreme Court ruling that the FCC is illegal and actually owes carriers money for some reason
- TimorousBestie 1y ago
  SCOTUS hates the DC Circuit almost as much as it hates the Ninth; this decision is dead on arrival.
  - kstrauser 1y ago
    If that were the case, then it would probably stand. The Ninth usually has the lowest, or among the lowest, reversal rate of any district: https://ballotpedia.org/SCOTUS_case_reversal_rates_(2007_-_Present) https://ballotpedia.org/SCOTUS_case_reversal_rates_(2007_-_P... You hear a lot of lies to the contrary that it has the highest number of reversals, which is misleadingly irrelevant because the Ninth also has by far the greatest number of decisions. It's like saying that New York City has more violent crimes than El Paso, which utterly ignores the population difference between the two.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - abduhl 1y ago
      Your link says that the 9th is the most reversed circuit both in terms of raw reversals (196) and as a rate (79.4%).
      - fn-mote 1y ago
        Include the time frame when you talk about this. 2007-present, in this case People making conclusions should look at the data, though. In this case, every ciruit has a 64+% reversal rate, the sixth has a reversal rate almost identical to the 9th. I have no idea what a significant difference would be. Maybe someone can explain a set of assumptions and the resulting variance.
        Larrikin 1y ago
        That makes everything seem completely arbitrary and not based on anything besides personal feelings
        BrenBarn 1y ago
        You have just described law in the United States. :-)
        abduhl 1y ago
        I didn't choose the data set or the link, perhaps your admonishment should be levied against GP. I agree that people should look at the data before making conclusions, which is why I posted that the data directly contradicted GP's claim that the 9th "usually has the lowest, or among the lowest, reversal rate of any district." It doesn't. Based on the data, it has not only the highest reversal rate but also the highest amount of reversals. I take no position on whether the 9th's reversal rate is significantly different than any other circuit's other than to note that it is the highest by all reported metrics and that when you hear that fact, it isn't a "lie" (as characterized by the GP).
        JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > 2007-present, in this case '07 seems arbitrary. 2017 would be a better date, given that's when Gorsuch flipped the Court conservative. (Though it really went full dumbfuck when Barrett started giving Alito and Thomas cover.)
guywithahat 1y ago
[flagged]
- nightfly 1y ago
  More like selling when and where you got on and off the bus
  - guywithahat 1y ago
    Yeah I mean that's fair, it's hard to tell exactly what's happening from the article. To be clear I'm not saying tmobile is right or wrong, just that I don't think the title is totally honest here
- shakna 1y ago
  Probably worth noting that selling this phone location data is already considered illegal in most other nations.
SilverElfin 1y ago
Is there any way to block this location data sharing? What about other carriers? I always think about denying apps access to this stuff but a carrier tracking me is insane and scary. The linked article makes it seem like ATT and Verizon also do this.
- TimorousBestie 1y ago
  Probably not. The infrastructure has to know where your cell phone is in order to communicate with it. Last I checked, the large carriers in the states hoard this information for years.
  - jacquesm 1y ago
    This is not quite true. They have to know roughly where your cell phone is but, helpfully, your cellphone starts the process as soon as you start it up and then it is a courtesy to you that the unit closest to you will handle your call(s) and other traffic because that will save you battery and reduces the amount of power your phone will use which in turn will allow others relatively nearby to use the same slice of the spectrum while you are transmitting. Phased arrays on the mast make this even more precise and further conserve power. But that really is a courtesy: it would all work without that luxury but less efficient and your phone's battery would be empty faster. The part that really is optional is where the carrier then stores and even sells your location. They are mandated by law with respect to the first and they abuse the technical capabilities of the system for the second. And even if it isn't very precise for a single measurement it is in fact quite precise after you haven't moved for a while.
    - Spooky23 1y ago
      They know alot. The data is used to estimate average speeds on roads with alot of throughput and can profile location between known sites. (Work/school/etc) You can buy data about the incomes of people driving past a given intersection. That's why you'll see a Starbucks sometimes on a trunk road in a sketch area.
aeon_ai 1y ago
Opt-out links by carrier: ATT - https://www.att.com/consent/ccpa/dnsatt https://www.att.com/consent/ccpa/dnsatt T-Mobile: https://www.t-mobile.com/privacy-center https://www.t-mobile.com/privacy-center --Access the Privacy Dashboard Adjust the following privacy settings (toggle off as desired), per line/account: - Profiling and automated decisions (on by default) - Fraud and identity theft protection (shares account and usage info) - Sharing certain financial information (payment history, balances, etc.) - Analytics and reporting, Advertising options, and Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information Verizon - Go to your MyVerizon Navigate to Account > Account Settings > Privacy Settings on the web; or tap the gear icon and choose Manage privacy settings in the app. Locate the following tracking options: - Custom Experience - Custom Experience Plus - Business & Marketing Insights - CPNI (Customer Proprietary Network Information) and Identity Verification programs -For each, select "Don't Use" or toggle off to opt out
- RajT88 1y ago
  Just checked my T-Mobile privacy settings. I had most everything turned off, but then I saw a few were turned on (such as my opt-out marketing settings). Opting out of everything took 2 tries to have them all disabled (sludge). This one was seemingly a new one, and makes the hairs on my neck go up: Make your choice about profiling and automated decisions. You can tell us not to use your personal data for certain kinds of "profiling" that we might do in the future. This toggle allows you to opt out of having profiling used for future decisions that produce legal or similarly significant effects about you. We don't use profiling to make these kinds of decisions now. Turning this "OFF" or gray means "opt out of profiling and automated decisions."
  - pixl97 1y ago
    For some reason I cannot turn off the "Alert the Gestapo if I remain too close to an abortion clinic for too long option" on my account, says not available for Texas accounts.
    - DrillShopper 1y ago
      You're going to have to wait until Texas voters collectively grow the ability to reason and a backbone before you can toggle that option off (yes, I know it's not all of them but the fact that Abbot and company aren't metaphorically tarred and feathered then run out of town on a rail for even suggesting redistricting right now is telling)
Lammy 1y ago
I did a cross-continent drive last month with my T-Mobile US phone and got a rude awakening of how real-time this is when the “source” area codes of all the spammy phone calls followed me from state to state. e: I thought I had opted out of everything that was opt-out-able in TMo's privacy settings <https://www.t-mobile.com/privacy-center/dashboard/controls https://www.t-mobile.com/privacy-center/dashboard/controls> years ago when I first set up my line/account, but I just checked again and more than half of the settings were enabled. Hate that I have to be in the habit of looking for new settings that default to enabled.
- pavel_lishin 1y ago
  Weird! 99% of my spam calls come from the same area code as my cellphone number.
  - Terr_ 1y ago
    I think they mean scammers have adapted to targeting the area-codes your phone appears to be located now, as opposed to (just) the area code where you originally got your phone number. For a lot of people the difference won't be apparent, because they haven't moved.
    - Lammy 1y ago
      Exactly
    - pavel_lishin 1y ago
      I have definitely moved.
- gkoz 1y ago
  How are the economics supposed to work here? Is the data so cheap they can get everyone's location several times a day despite having no need for it? What's in it for the carrier then?
- saltcured 1y ago
  I relocated during the pandemic and brought my existing (Los Angeles area code) number to the SF Bay Area with Mint Mobile. I really don't get local area code spam after five years. The few calls that do happen, I can trace by topic back to local business interactions I've had. I'm not sure whether to think the Mint MVNO on T-Mobile is better about privacy than T-Mobile. Or do you have some phone apps that are really the guilty party linking your phone number to your travel locations...?
xyst 1y ago
What would it take to disrupt the oligopoly of limited carriers in the USA? I feel this type of behavior will continue with minimal repercussions. Maybe a slap on the wrist. FCC, whether intentional or unintentional, through their controlled access to wireless spectrum has made it near impossible for smaller players to disrupt them. I know "MVNOs" exist but they just resell the spectrum/network from the big 3 carriers in the USA.
- jacquesm 1y ago
  A very large amount of capital, a substantial fraction of which you will be wasting on lobbying and financing the parties that managed to get spectrum allocated before you thought of this.
  - xyst 1y ago
    So next step is: breaking up the big 3, then. If you have to lobby, then may as well attack them head on. Unfortunately, I think the current administration will _not_ help with this.
  - xp84 1y ago
    Don’t underestimate how cheap it actually is to buy politicians. A lot of Trump’s “big donors” who received billions of dollars worth of windfalls from his moves last term, were donors of a few million. Congress, too. Politicians are a very cheap investment compared to say, laying fiber covering a single metro area.
    - Nextgrid 1y ago
      > Don’t underestimate how cheap it actually is to buy politicians But if your idea becomes an extinction-level threat for a well-funded industry, surely they will also try to buy the politicians, getting into a bidding war with you, throwing their entire war-chest at the problem if necessary (knowing that thanks to their monopoly they have effectively forever to get it back).
      - 1y ago
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
semiquaver 1y ago
> The carriers did not verify whether buyers obtained customer consent, the ruling said. I know this whole business is a series of fictions about consent, but what does this even mean? How would buyers of my location data obtain my consent before buying it? Surely it would be the sellers (the carriers themselves) who would be responsible for obtaining permission to sell.

391 points by Bender 1y ago

sour-taste 1y ago

Look forward to the supreme Court ruling that the FCC is illegal and actually owes carriers money for some reason

TimorousBestie 1y ago
SCOTUS hates the DC Circuit almost as much as it hates the Ninth; this decision is dead on arrival.
- kstrauser 1y ago
  If that were the case, then it would probably stand. The Ninth usually has the lowest, or among the lowest, reversal rate of any district: https://ballotpedia.org/SCOTUS_case_reversal_rates_(2007_-_Present) https://ballotpedia.org/SCOTUS_case_reversal_rates_(2007_-_P... You hear a lot of lies to the contrary that it has the highest number of reversals, which is misleadingly irrelevant because the Ninth also has by far the greatest number of decisions. It's like saying that New York City has more violent crimes than El Paso, which utterly ignores the population difference between the two.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - abduhl 1y ago
    Your link says that the 9th is the most reversed circuit both in terms of raw reversals (196) and as a rate (79.4%).
    - fn-mote 1y ago
      Include the time frame when you talk about this. 2007-present, in this case People making conclusions should look at the data, though. In this case, every ciruit has a 64+% reversal rate, the sixth has a reversal rate almost identical to the 9th. I have no idea what a significant difference would be. Maybe someone can explain a set of assumptions and the resulting variance.
      - Larrikin 1y ago
        That makes everything seem completely arbitrary and not based on anything besides personal feelings
        BrenBarn 1y ago
        You have just described law in the United States. :-)
      - abduhl 1y ago
        I didn't choose the data set or the link, perhaps your admonishment should be levied against GP. I agree that people should look at the data before making conclusions, which is why I posted that the data directly contradicted GP's claim that the 9th "usually has the lowest, or among the lowest, reversal rate of any district." It doesn't. Based on the data, it has not only the highest reversal rate but also the highest amount of reversals. I take no position on whether the 9th's reversal rate is significantly different than any other circuit's other than to note that it is the highest by all reported metrics and that when you hear that fact, it isn't a "lie" (as characterized by the GP).
      - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
        > 2007-present, in this case '07 seems arbitrary. 2017 would be a better date, given that's when Gorsuch flipped the Court conservative. (Though it really went full dumbfuck when Barrett started giving Alito and Thomas cover.)

guywithahat 1y ago

[flagged]

nightfly 1y ago
More like selling when and where you got on and off the bus
- guywithahat 1y ago
  Yeah I mean that's fair, it's hard to tell exactly what's happening from the article. To be clear I'm not saying tmobile is right or wrong, just that I don't think the title is totally honest here
shakna 1y ago
Probably worth noting that selling this phone location data is already considered illegal in most other nations.

SilverElfin 1y ago

Is there any way to block this location data sharing? What about other carriers? I always think about denying apps access to this stuff but a carrier tracking me is insane and scary. The linked article makes it seem like ATT and Verizon also do this.

TimorousBestie 1y ago
Probably not. The infrastructure has to know where your cell phone is in order to communicate with it. Last I checked, the large carriers in the states hoard this information for years.
- jacquesm 1y ago
  This is not quite true. They have to know roughly where your cell phone is but, helpfully, your cellphone starts the process as soon as you start it up and then it is a courtesy to you that the unit closest to you will handle your call(s) and other traffic because that will save you battery and reduces the amount of power your phone will use which in turn will allow others relatively nearby to use the same slice of the spectrum while you are transmitting. Phased arrays on the mast make this even more precise and further conserve power. But that really is a courtesy: it would all work without that luxury but less efficient and your phone's battery would be empty faster. The part that really is optional is where the carrier then stores and even sells your location. They are mandated by law with respect to the first and they abuse the technical capabilities of the system for the second. And even if it isn't very precise for a single measurement it is in fact quite precise after you haven't moved for a while.
  - Spooky23 1y ago
    They know alot. The data is used to estimate average speeds on roads with alot of throughput and can profile location between known sites. (Work/school/etc) You can buy data about the incomes of people driving past a given intersection. That's why you'll see a Starbucks sometimes on a trunk road in a sketch area.

aeon_ai 1y ago

Opt-out links by carrier: ATT - https://www.att.com/consent/ccpa/dnsatt https://www.att.com/consent/ccpa/dnsatt T-Mobile: https://www.t-mobile.com/privacy-center https://www.t-mobile.com/privacy-center --Access the Privacy Dashboard Adjust the following privacy settings (toggle off as desired), per line/account: - Profiling and automated decisions (on by default) - Fraud and identity theft protection (shares account and usage info) - Sharing certain financial information (payment history, balances, etc.) - Analytics and reporting, Advertising options, and Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information Verizon - Go to your MyVerizon Navigate to Account > Account Settings > Privacy Settings on the web; or tap the gear icon and choose Manage privacy settings in the app. Locate the following tracking options: - Custom Experience - Custom Experience Plus - Business & Marketing Insights - CPNI (Customer Proprietary Network Information) and Identity Verification programs -For each, select "Don't Use" or toggle off to opt out

RajT88 1y ago
Just checked my T-Mobile privacy settings. I had most everything turned off, but then I saw a few were turned on (such as my opt-out marketing settings). Opting out of everything took 2 tries to have them all disabled (sludge). This one was seemingly a new one, and makes the hairs on my neck go up: Make your choice about profiling and automated decisions. You can tell us not to use your personal data for certain kinds of "profiling" that we might do in the future. This toggle allows you to opt out of having profiling used for future decisions that produce legal or similarly significant effects about you. We don't use profiling to make these kinds of decisions now. Turning this "OFF" or gray means "opt out of profiling and automated decisions."
- pixl97 1y ago
  For some reason I cannot turn off the "Alert the Gestapo if I remain too close to an abortion clinic for too long option" on my account, says not available for Texas accounts.
  - DrillShopper 1y ago
    You're going to have to wait until Texas voters collectively grow the ability to reason and a backbone before you can toggle that option off (yes, I know it's not all of them but the fact that Abbot and company aren't metaphorically tarred and feathered then run out of town on a rail for even suggesting redistricting right now is telling)

Lammy 1y ago

I did a cross-continent drive last month with my T-Mobile US phone and got a rude awakening of how real-time this is when the “source” area codes of all the spammy phone calls followed me from state to state. e: I thought I had opted out of everything that was opt-out-able in TMo's privacy settings <https://www.t-mobile.com/privacy-center/dashboard/controls https://www.t-mobile.com/privacy-center/dashboard/controls> years ago when I first set up my line/account, but I just checked again and more than half of the settings were enabled. Hate that I have to be in the habit of looking for new settings that default to enabled.

pavel_lishin 1y ago
Weird! 99% of my spam calls come from the same area code as my cellphone number.
- Terr_ 1y ago
  I think they mean scammers have adapted to targeting the area-codes your phone appears to be located now, as opposed to (just) the area code where you originally got your phone number. For a lot of people the difference won't be apparent, because they haven't moved.
  - Lammy 1y ago
    Exactly
  - pavel_lishin 1y ago
    I have definitely moved.
gkoz 1y ago
How are the economics supposed to work here? Is the data so cheap they can get everyone's location several times a day despite having no need for it? What's in it for the carrier then?
saltcured 1y ago
I relocated during the pandemic and brought my existing (Los Angeles area code) number to the SF Bay Area with Mint Mobile. I really don't get local area code spam after five years. The few calls that do happen, I can trace by topic back to local business interactions I've had. I'm not sure whether to think the Mint MVNO on T-Mobile is better about privacy than T-Mobile. Or do you have some phone apps that are really the guilty party linking your phone number to your travel locations...?

xyst 1y ago

What would it take to disrupt the oligopoly of limited carriers in the USA? I feel this type of behavior will continue with minimal repercussions. Maybe a slap on the wrist. FCC, whether intentional or unintentional, through their controlled access to wireless spectrum has made it near impossible for smaller players to disrupt them. I know "MVNOs" exist but they just resell the spectrum/network from the big 3 carriers in the USA.

jacquesm 1y ago
A very large amount of capital, a substantial fraction of which you will be wasting on lobbying and financing the parties that managed to get spectrum allocated before you thought of this.
- xyst 1y ago
  So next step is: breaking up the big 3, then. If you have to lobby, then may as well attack them head on. Unfortunately, I think the current administration will _not_ help with this.
- xp84 1y ago
  Don’t underestimate how cheap it actually is to buy politicians. A lot of Trump’s “big donors” who received billions of dollars worth of windfalls from his moves last term, were donors of a few million. Congress, too. Politicians are a very cheap investment compared to say, laying fiber covering a single metro area.
  - Nextgrid 1y ago
    > Don’t underestimate how cheap it actually is to buy politicians But if your idea becomes an extinction-level threat for a well-funded industry, surely they will also try to buy the politicians, getting into a bidding war with you, throwing their entire war-chest at the problem if necessary (knowing that thanks to their monopoly they have effectively forever to get it back).
    - 1y ago

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

semiquaver 1y ago

> The carriers did not verify whether buyers obtained customer consent, the ruling said. I know this whole business is a series of fictions about consent, but what does this even mean? How would buyers of my location data obtain my consent before buying it? Surely it would be the sellers (the carriers themselves) who would be responsible for obtaining permission to sell.