Microsoft's Consent-or-Die Patent 179
theodp writes "Maybe you shouldn't get too attached to those new Windows Live services. On Tuesday, the USPTO granted Microsoft a patent for privacy policy change notification, which describes how to threaten users with the loss of their accounts and access to web sites and services should they refuse to consent to changes in a privacy policy. This includes the case where a user might object to allowing personal information, collected earlier with a promise of confidentiality, to be shared in the future with third parties. Also described is a 'Never Notify Me' option so you won't have to 'worry' over privacy policy changes."
What is this, anyway? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What is this, anyway? (Score:4, Funny)
I've got one mod point left. And instead of using it, I'm posting here to let you know that I'd use it on you had I not decided to post to this topic.
But, in the end, you weren't compelling enough.
I was looking for more substance, something that I could use around the water-cooler later this morning. I wanted something that would just hit me at my very core and tell me that, "Yes, all of America is summed up in that very statement, and FlyByPC has his finger on the very pulse of the nation."
Instead, I feel like the prom date, who gets up to the front porch at the end of the evening and gets a handshake and a "I had a nice time."
Am I asking too much?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The opposite of bad is good, the opposite of good is bad. The opposite of evil is NOT: Good!
There claim to be so many atheists amongst the Slashdot crowd; well you don't need religion if you see everything as good and evil, why? Because it is what is known as SLAVE MORALITY. [wikipedia.org]
The closest thing I could get to the
Re: (Score:2)
You've never played D&D, right? It might be fun to see a "lawful compassionate" Paladin compassionately smiting the "chaotic bad" tribesmen of Wuu.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Moral?
Re:What is this, anyway? (Score:5, Insightful)
There is. To deny that is to embrace relativism, which precludes any possibility of weighing one's actions according to a moral standard.
I agree with you that rich is not evil. Wealth is amoral, neither being rich nor being poor makes one good or evil. That doesn't mean there's no evil.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
hawkk
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What is this, anyway? (Score:4, Insightful)
It does, however, raise two interesting points:
1) The current ridiculousness of the patent system. The patent system is intended to stimulate innovation by protecting useful ideas. If you're right, this is an attempt to stop a certain kind of behavior by a large company. Isn't that what the legislature is for?
2) If you're going to trust your data to a third party by keeping it online only, make SURE you have the right to retrieve it without entering into further agreements.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember that this is about a patent. What does it actually mean if Microsoft gets a patent for this? It means nobody else can do it without paying license fees to Microsoft, and nobody can stop Microsoft by pointing to a patent that they
Re: (Score:2)
#include "disclaimer.h"
#include "not_lawyer.h"
I'm not so sure, but at least in contract law, courts seem to encourage the use of "self-help" measures when it looks like things are going sour, before getting the courts involved. If you squint a bit this could be considered a self-help measure of a different sort. Besides, we've all seen what a hash legislatures seem to ma
Re: (Score:2)
They already have the market cornered on "Consent AND die."
"Yes, No, Cancel" =>BlueScreenOfDeath
They're just embracing and extending their own prior art.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
And the award... (Score:3, Funny)
Unenforceable in many states (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Unenforceable in many states (Score:4, Informative)
(IANALTINLA)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
1) Patent commonly violated law (e.g. speeding)
2) Wait for public record of convictions
3) Profit!!
Re: (Score:2)
You can't have a Profit list without a "???" entry.
Re: (Score:2)
Because that kind of thing wouldn't be at all useful in the legal production of medical opiates (morphine, codeine phosphate, etc)....
IANALTINLA? (Score:2)
(Honestly, There's A Point When You Need To Stop With The Acronyms A Just Say What You F@@king Mean!)
Como? (Score:2)
I Am Not A LaTIN LuvA?
You won't die. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:You won't die. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
No. You are obviously confused by iPacemaker which synchronizes paces with iPaces through iComputer using iSoftware. But luckily you get them all from the same vendor! Just remember to sign a contract with AT&DT and hope your iPaces account is opened in time...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh wait, those are "yodabeats".
Re: (Score:2)
ass-immo-lated
Re:You won't die. (Score:4, Funny)
But they won't let you 'Live' (Score:2)
Good (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Good (Score:5, Funny)
No, it just means they will sue your pants off if you are more unethical than they are.
Re:Good (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Look at a cell phone contract sometime. If you leave early you pay a fee, if they company forces you out they pay no fee, etc.
Business 101: Screw your customer and get more mo
Yeah, this is surely good for us (Score:2)
M$ will surely help you
Re: (Score:2)
I am not sure it is unethical. Unethical would be for the original privacy policy to include a clause stating they could change the policy at will and without new consent. At least they are giving you an chance to opt out.
They are after all providing a free (as in beer) service. It is their right to put whatever requirements they choose upon your use. It is your right to not use the service. Yeah I agree it is a shitty thing to do, but how many sites have
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it could mean one of two things. Either they don't want anyone else doing this (as someone pointed out above), or they want to insist on the status of not being just evil, but rather being the masters of all evil (so they want to be paid by anyone else who decides to be evil).
Re: (Score:2)
Me? Personally, I've caved, again and again. (Score:5, Interesting)
I hate myself for it, but I've kept using Amazon because, well, darn it, they're convenient and inexpensive and efficient.
Dave Barry once commented that he now has to drive ten miles to buy anything, because he realized that over the years there wasn't a single business within ten miles of which he hadn't said at one time or another "I'll never patronize them again."
Re:Me? Personally, I've caved, again and again. (Score:4, Informative)
Pretty refreshing to see that a smaller business 'gets it'.
Bicycle companies are cool (Score:3, Interesting)
My wife is a devotee of Terry Precision Cycling. It was started by a woman who couldn't find a bike to fit her. She happened to be a mechanical engineer, and the light bulb came on over her head. My wife's bike came with a homemade desktop-published manual that is among the very best manuals I've ever seen for any product whatsoever. The first time my wife had a slig
speedgoat (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are lots of alternatives to Amazon, which is the Wal-Mart of the book sales industry. For example Powell's Books [powells.com].
Re: (Score:2)
I can't say I've had Amazon spam problems - but then again I do have a good spam filter so I might not ever see it.
Re:[ACMe? Personally, I've caved, again and again. (Score:2)
1. I fail to see how spending money at **another online bookstore** is **not** putting a local retailer out of business, which is what GP suggested.
2. The college bookstore is subsidized by eFollet and the university and run by students at minimum wage (I know, I have friends that worked there when I lived on campus). They don't need my support to stay in business.
3. Saving that $50 allowed me spend
A digital heart plug (Score:3, Funny)
"Don't be angry. Everyone gets one here."
One twist by a Microsoft cubical creep and all your data drains out.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn that's evil! (Score:3, Informative)
Damn that's evil! Really, what quicker way to drive away users - program your application to piss them off and then stop working.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know why people are thinking this is a new idea. After all, Windows has been doing the exact same thing for years.
Re: (Score:2)
P Since that seems to be the default behavior for most Microsoft programs (Annoy, Annoy, Annoy, Reboot), I fail to see why this this would drive users away.... Hasn't in the past at any rate.
Re: (Score:2)
True enough but that seems to me to be evil as a side effect, as opposed to declared, deliberate, premeditated evil.
I mean imagine you have tons of data in word documents (or some other MS-app created data store), and MS or someone you think is MS changes the privacy policy allowing them to publish your address li
New Definition for a Process? (Score:2)
Think of the adults! (Score:5, Insightful)
Sigh...
1. If you don't like the service or the TOS that comes with it, don't use it.
2. If you are worried that a service you previously liked would change it TOS and make your data inaccessible should you refuse it, keep backup of the data.
3. If you are afraid of being led to a new TOS through vendor lock-in, take preventive measures to ensure a smooth rollover to another provided should something go wrong.
4. If you are worried a TOS may have something you are not willing to accept, actually take time to read it before clicking "Next". If you don't understand something, there are a lot of places online where you can discuss a TOS and get a legal-to-human translation of it, especially TOSs of big corporations.
5. If you don't follow any of the above points, only blame yourself when you get screwed over.
As much as companies want to, they can't (legally) FORCE you to allow them to use your data for anything if you didn't accept the TOS. Especially now that courts upheld the law that companies must obtain consent before continuing to provide service with a modified TOS. Companies can mislead you, try to mask the truth, entice you with BS offers, sweet-talk you, downplay the entire thing, block you from using their services (or even access to your data)... But they can't FORCE you to play by their rules.
As a consumer, you have the ultimate power to affect corporate decisions - either use their service or don't. Those who whine about how bad/unethical a particular service is, but keep using it, are hypocrites, not to mention stupid, and fully deserve whatever consequences they get from being sheep.
For the rest of us, there is a good amount of viable alternatives to be able to drop one provider for the favor of another at (almost) a moment's notice, but iff the basic rules above are being followed. If not, then, as I said, blame nobody but yourself when you have "no choice" but to be the company's data slave.
And can we, FFS, stop protecting the "innocent consumers" who get screwed over by evil corporations due to their stupidity? Seriously, this is worse than the "think of the children" mentality - at least you could argue that children are too young to think for themselves - but adults should really know better. Let people get what they deserve.
You're missing the point. (Score:2, Interesting)
1) Put up with it. You get screwed, but you get the service. I
2) Quietly abstain from using the service. This is the option that you seem to advocate. You lose the service, the provider loses your patronage. In fact, everyone loses, but only a little bit, so it's better than option 1.
3) Complain loudly about it. This is w
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless they collude with the government to make it legal for them to force you to allow them to use your data for anything they damn well please.
AT&T, I'm looking in your direction.
Re: (Score:2)
How practical is it to leave them when they decide to let their employees and "trusted third parties" snoop into your data? Somebody else can dive in and practically steal your identity. There's no time to prepare - you log in one day, and you can't access your data until you allow *them* to snoop your data, and maybe even retain your data after you close your account.
Hopefully any court would agree that a
As opposed to...? (Score:3, Insightful)
As opposed to...? How it is now, that if you disagree with a site's current or new privacy policy you shouldn't, y'know, use them? Say for example GMail changes their privacy policy, and tells its users that it's going to start divulging the contents of your all your email to 'select marketing partners' for 'market research' purposes. I can't tell them "You know what, I don't care what the rest of your users do, but I'm going to stick with the original privacy policy, kay?" I either, as the submitter puts it, consent or die.
Be glad that in the figure they indicate they'd let you delete your account in that case.
PS - I'd seriously dig a Windows theme that looked like that.
Seriously, I think the poster missed the point... (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't see the bold new invention here worthy of a patent.
Are they claiming to have invented a "Whatever" button? Or is it a patent on using previously supplied information to contact a user?
As for the "threaten" aspect, it's not a threat - if a site changes it's policies and a user doesn't agree, why shouldn't they cancel the user?
Shame on the Patent Office for approving this silly patent, and good luck to MS to try and derive money from it!
A patent? (Score:2)
This should be someting for contract attorneys/court, not the patent office.
Court case? (Score:2, Informative)
I don't remember all the details, but from what I do remember it mandated that parties must be informed of any changes to contracts/agreements. You couldn't have a clause like "we don't need to notify you of changes to this agreement". So, if that is the case, doesn't it kill the entire purpose of this patent?
BTW - I really think things like this should not be patentable. This is not an invention.
Re: (Score:2)
e.g. when my bank changes its contract, it has to give me 30 days notification by post before the changes take place. Longer if the changes are to my disadvantage. Then, I can transfer my money elsewhere.
This is more like my bank prompting me about the new contract the next time I put my card in an ATM. "If you decline, your account will be closed and all the money will become inaccessible. You cannot withdraw money u
Good thing... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Would it be legal? (Score:5, Funny)
Your Honor, I plead not guilty to the charges, as it was consensual. As per my consent notification system (defense exhibit A, the T-Shirt) and my consent management system, it is very clear that I have implied consent of the plaintiff.
Re: (Score:2)
I think I'm missing something (Score:2)
Most of the sites I've ever visited (and bothered to read their privacy policy) tell me that they have the right to change the policy at any time, it is up to me to keep abreast of their changes and by continuing to use the site I accept any revisions t
I have prior art! (Score:2)
OMG! (Score:3, Insightful)
That said, I have two real problems with the patent. One is that there seems to be a lot of prior art here; the other is that everything discussed in the patent is pretty obvious stuff. A patent like this should never have been granted.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If technically elite do not watch out for everyone else, then we all get what we deserve.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What, exactly, does he "get?" A society where privacy concerns are eventually so eroded among a large majority - accustomed to think of intrusions into their privacy as normal - that government or corporate action could abolish meaningful privacy for the "rest of us?"
Sorry, but I feel that it is "my job" to inform people about the underhandedness with which their private information is dealt. I certainly don't want them t
Re: (Score:2)
At the risk of being modded offtopic, it's attitudes like this that foment the creation of the Storm worm botnet.
You sure that's such a good idea? (Score:2)
So if you're not in that "club", it is probably in your interest to make sure that the common man gets a better deal than they would get, left to the likes of Microsoft, Fox News, *AA, Sony, Hollywood, MTV, Monsanto etc.
If you're in that "club", then I'm not surprised you'd feel that way about the "common man", or for that matter everyone else you no longer need[1]
Re:Well, if you don't like the privacy policy... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well, if you don't like the privacy policy... (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps some other people should point out these concerns to those people, who probably have enough going on in their lives to not contemplate their legal status with regard to their computer applications.
Perhaps these other people could have a website that aggregates stories pointing out such examples of corporate buggery, and that provides a forum for folks to discuss them. Perhaps they could get enough exposure to occasionally penetrate the online public's consciousness.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps some other people should point out these concerns to those people, who probably have enough going on in their lives to not contemplate their legal status with regard to their computer applications.
Oh, no... I say let 'em find out the hard way.
The sight of MSFT's Redmond campus in flames on CNN, surrounded by a huge chanting mob of pissed-off (and cut-off) users? It would be frickin' priceless.
Okay - all kidding aside, I am serious about wanting to let them find out the hard way in this case. It's going to be pretty obvious to anyone --with, say, a pr0n collection-- that suddenly his or her data is going to be under someone else's control and whim, and maybe that's not a good thing. Those who f
Re: (Score:2)
The reason the general public don't care is coz only a small number of people find out the hard way - the rest are unaffected. Now, you and I may refuse to use these services on ethical grounds, or because we don't want to take the chance of being part of the minority group who actually gets screwed over, but most of the general public don't know and don't care (unless they are one of the few who does get screwed).
The really sucky thing is that sometimes it's r
Re: (Score:2)
Most software is not a commodity (Score:2)
In the absence of strong ass
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
* electric power
* water
* gas
* police dept
* fire dept
* road repair
(ok, amend that to 'no significant amount of control')
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now it turns out, they patented their evil ways too.
At which point you want to say no to their methods?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, since Microsoft agrees to perform something of value (provide a service) and it is not a non-profit organization, it must be assumed that (because of their stated intent in the incorporation charter) whatever it is getting in exchange is something that it deems to be of value. It could be something as trivial as an opportunity to display their ads.
Re: (Score:2)
And considering the agreement, just letting it pass them by might give legal problems later on when the user says he was not aware of it.