Speakers

Opinion On Lawsuit Against Bose: What Constitutes Digital Spying?

Opinion: Class-action lawsuit claims Bose violates Federal Wiretap Act by collecting data from wireless headphone users and sharing with a third-party data-mining firm. So what?

·

Read full article.

5 Comments
Posted by kabazo on April 19, 2017

I agree that it would be a normal expectation that a connected device collects some data and than without that data the usefulness of the device (or service provided) will be reduced if not obsolete. The issue should be more about the extent of data collected, its purpose, the way it is kept (identifiable or aggregate) and for what it’s being used. All of these deserve to be communicated to users much like it’s normal to have “opt in” for direct emails. If not government regulations there may be room for industry best practices and even standards (if such don’t exist) for both disclaimer language and data collection itself.

Posted by hmurchison on April 19, 2017

It’s not just Bose it’s generally any company that has a networked product that can collect data.  There is a fine line here between collecting useful data and collecting data for profit.  Citizens need to understand that in the digital age it’s more important than ever to have a Bill of Rights for Privacy codified.

Posted by paul greatreps.com on April 20, 2017

I wonder if the plaintiff has a Facebook account?

Posted by Bill Kearney on April 21, 2017

For the sake of clarity, what funds has Bose paid to CEPro or their respective companies?  What, if any, financial relationship exists involving Bose or their representatives?

Posted by Julie Jacobson on April 21, 2017

Bill, is there something in this piece that you disagree with? Would love to hear your thoughts. My thoughts and questions are generally in line with others. See, for example:

http://bgr.com/2017/04/20/bose-lawsuit-privacy-connect-app-meh/
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/04/man-claims-his-bose-headphones-capture-what-hes-listening-to/

We shall see if Bose actually did something illegal. Perhaps they did. I think some of the questions raised in this piece would be interesting to ponder. But that’s just me. I happen to be very interested in law stuff and would enjoy hearing yours and others’ opinions on the matter.

Thanks for reading.

5 Comments
Posted by Julie Jacobson on April 21, 2017

Bill, is there something in this piece that you disagree with? Would love to hear your thoughts. My thoughts and questions are generally in line with others. See, for example:

http://bgr.com/2017/04/20/bose-lawsuit-privacy-connect-app-meh/
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/04/man-claims-his-bose-headphones-capture-what-hes-listening-to/

We shall see if Bose actually did something illegal. Perhaps they did. I think some of the questions raised in this piece would be interesting to ponder. But that’s just me. I happen to be very interested in law stuff and would enjoy hearing yours and others’ opinions on the matter.

Thanks for reading.

Posted by Bill Kearney on April 21, 2017

For the sake of clarity, what funds has Bose paid to CEPro or their respective companies?  What, if any, financial relationship exists involving Bose or their representatives?

Posted by paul greatreps.com on April 20, 2017

I wonder if the plaintiff has a Facebook account?

Posted by hmurchison on April 19, 2017

It’s not just Bose it’s generally any company that has a networked product that can collect data.  There is a fine line here between collecting useful data and collecting data for profit.  Citizens need to understand that in the digital age it’s more important than ever to have a Bill of Rights for Privacy codified.

Posted by kabazo on April 19, 2017

I agree that it would be a normal expectation that a connected device collects some data and than without that data the usefulness of the device (or service provided) will be reduced if not obsolete. The issue should be more about the extent of data collected, its purpose, the way it is kept (identifiable or aggregate) and for what it’s being used. All of these deserve to be communicated to users much like it’s normal to have “opt in” for direct emails. If not government regulations there may be room for industry best practices and even standards (if such don’t exist) for both disclaimer language and data collection itself.