Safeway Club Card Leads to Bogus Arson Arrest 505
Richard M. Smith writes "Tukwila, Washington firefighter, Philip Scott Lyons found out the hard way
that supermarket loyalty cards come with a huge price. Lyons was arrested
last August and charged with attempted arson. Police alleged at the time
that Lyons tried to set fire to his own house while his wife and children
were inside. According to KOMO-TV and the Seattle Times, a major piece of evidence used against Lyons in his arrest was the record of his supermarket purchases that he made with his Safeway Club Card. Police
investigators had discovered that his Club Card was used to buy fire starters of the same type used in the arson attempt. For Lyons, the story did have a happy ending. All charges were dropped against him in January 2005 because another person stepped forward saying he or she
set the fire and not Lyons."
The wife? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:The wife? (Score:3, Insightful)
If the kid us underage, that would explain why they kept the identity a secret.
Re:The wife? (Score:5, Insightful)
You just go through the line and they say "do you have a Safeway Club Card?".
You say, "I don't have it with me".
The cashier will say "What's your last name and four digits of your telephone number?".
Give them a last name and a telephone number. Voila. In other words, you could get all of the information necessary to frame the other person on the basis of a club card purchase, by looking in a telephone book. Any half assed lawyer would know that and have the trial and charges dismissed in a heartbeat.
Re:The wife? (Score:2)
I guess it's different at Safeway, but at the store i'm using for the moment, I have to provide a driver's license if I forget my card and still want to use my account.
Glad i've seen this story now, at any rate. Going to be moving soon, and I sure won't be using Safeway wherever I end up.
Re:The wife? (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't believe everybody just queues up and plays their privacy invasion game. What's next? "Identify for retina scan" to buy a pint of Ben & Jerry's?
The club cards are a paper thin scam. They raise prices slightly, then offer the club card to get slightly lower prices than they had before the card. Then, a couple of months later, after everyone is signed up, they raise the prices. You're now paying at least as much as you were before the card, and if you resist you're charged 30% more as a penalty for not voluntarily surrendering your personal information.
US currency does still carry the phrase "legal tender", right? I guess they can legally force you to pay a 30% penalty for paying in cash.
I'm not an anarchist, but it really is nobody's business if I want to buy a box of condoms, three tubes of KY jelly, 50 feet of rope and a jar of Smuckers (TM) strawberry jam.
Coercing people into surrendering their personal information to buy groceries is wrong. It's an abuse of technology. That so few people complain about this loss of privacy is proof of how bad things are in the United States of Sheeple. Hopefully there will be some more high tech screw ups where people are falsely accused, or similar problems arise from using this dubious source of data, and people will finally awaken to what a shady scheme this is. Until that happens, I'll go out of my way to find one of the few stores that don't abuse my privacy. Have we really fallen so far that Safeway's desire for marketing data has now superseded our right to privacy?
Every time I to argue for privacy like this, I get responses from neo-Nazis who comment, "If you didn't do anything wrong, you have nothing to fear." Well, apparently "nothing" includes being falsely accused of a felony and the public humiliation of being tried for attempting to burn your family to death in their sleep.
Anybody remember when the police INVESTIGATED crimes, rather than just subpeona DNA, credit card records, phone records, Safeway records...?
The fifth amendment guarantees that no US citizens can be forced to testify against themselves. If forcing some guy to provide a DNA sample isn't forcing him to testify against himself, I don't know what is.
Technology itself isn't responsible for our eroding privacy, but it sure makes it easier for those who want the power that comes with all the collected personal data.
What a pervert! (Score:3, Funny)
That's disgusting!
Now, grape jelly on the other hand...
Loyalty programs do not mean higher prices (Score:4, Interesting)
Obviously you give up a bit of information to gain some benefit, and that's the case in a myriad of things we do each day. You provide info for credit card applications, job applications, drivers license applications, purchasing items online, etc.
Re:The wife? (Score:5, Interesting)
So, it's OK for the store to collect data of little value and then nullify their customer's right to privacy by providing it to the police so their customers can be falsely accused of a gruesome attempted felony? Are you really supporting this data collection?
BTW, One of the reasons that grocery shopping is such a PIA is the way the marketing idiots have arranged the store as a maze to increase sales. Customers are herded all over a large store just to buy the staple items most people want, with lots of opportunities to buy more stuff en route. Ever wondered why dairy is in one corner, produce is in the next county, etc.? If they'd put each item in one logical location instead of spreading them all over the store, and stop rearranging the store every other month to keep people confused, customers could find what they want and spend half the time doing it. But they'd rather waste your time to produce a 10% larger average grocery bill. Some marketing wiz got a promotion for it. Of course, that promotion was bestowed by the previously promoted room temperature IQ marketing wiz who never considered the obvious fact that customers would shop more often and probably spend more money if the store didn't go out of their way to create a customer hostile shopping experience. Ever find the display you want, and it's empty, then find the same item someplace else in the store where it's co-located with something else? Why don't they just dump all the store contents in a big heap in the middle of a warehouse? That should keep customers looking (and buying) for days.
Where I live, one grocery store, Krogers, has a near monopoly. There are few other decent choices. You think it's OK for a company to coerce customers into giving up their personal data and then a short time later charging them more for this privilege? Is that a legitimate offer, or a deceitful abuse of a near monopoly?
Re:The wife? (Score:5, Insightful)
Who says that the "personal" information has to pertain to you? Just invent some and give it to them. There is no law that says the info you give them has to be yours and they really have no way to check up on the whether the data pertains to you, someone else or to some non-existent person. They can still use the bogus info for their marketing statistics, just that they have no correct data on who bought what to give to the cops on demand. As the cops find out that most of the "personal" data the grocery store has is not associated truthfully with anyone, they'll stop bothering to even ask the grocery stores for it.
Re:The wife? (Score:4, Insightful)
If the stores are really only interested in anonymous data to analyse purchase patterns, then why do they link the purchase data individuals??
Why even bother with the "loyalty" programs? You can collect data on every single sale that is processed and analyze it till your balls fall off. Nothing is stopping a business from holding anonymous data and using it to their benefit.
So why bother? I'm sure it isn't to help law enforcement, because it costs money and these are businesses we are talking about - they don't make any money from policing. Personally identifiable information is held in the hopes of either:
i. offering consumers targeted advertising or
ii. selling the data to another company.
usage of the data against you by the long arm of the law is just an added bonus...
Re:The wife? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is another of those things that has little effect on criminals and terrorists but can royally screw over an honest citizen. I feel pretty much the same way over our local tollway I-Pass system: they roll over for the cops and attorneys on transponder data all the time. It's time we wake up and realize that the dubious "benefits" provided by mass acquisition and insecure long-term storage of personal information is probably not worth the effort.
I don't (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The wife? (Score:3, Interesting)
No fire-starters in the party supplies that I remember, but it would make an interesting blip in someone's record. (Especially when we did the same in the liquor store afterwards. Hmm.. One bottle of
Re:um, I work with CC terminals,-it's simple reall (Score:3, Insightful)
Until technology to somehow photocopy a barcode is developed, of course.
His kid... (or some other child) (Score:2, Insightful)
His kid would have access to his Safeway card. (Another kid might have access to his phone number, which will work just as well.)
The confessor is not being identified. (Also suggesting a child.)
Re:His kid... (or some other child) (Score:2)
so really.. what's the friggin deal with the card? it doesn't really prove anything since it was already known that the items belonged to the household
Re:His kid... (or some other child) (Score:2)
The deal is that the accused denied to have ever bought those firecrackers, and that the card records show that the purchase was booked on the card. And because the purchase was just a few weeks ago, the accused could probably not have forgotten that he actually bought the crackers, which made him suspicious.
Of course his wife could have bought the firecrackers with the family card, and I don't know what the buying age is for children there. But most of t
denial (Score:3, Insightful)
who really did it... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The wife? (Score:3, Interesting)
After reading the original article (before somebody else came forward) it really sounded like the guy was guilty -- and the Safeway card was just another piece of circumstantial evidence. They'd found motive, the other materials were from the house, etc.
Let me say that again -- the Safeway card was only one of many things that suggested that he did it.
The only thing that really
Still thinking? (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you kidding me? The wrongfully-accused was charged almost immediately, and now this guy fronted up and they're thinking about it?
Re:Still thinking? (Score:5, Insightful)
To engage in pure speculation: A possible situation could be that the fire was started by one of his kids. They would've had access to his card (and typically, kids don't have much cash either). The man's wife allegedly first spotted the fire, which makes me doubt it'd be her.
This would explain both why the procecutor has not decided if they should be charged, and also why they're not providing any identification. Hanging a presumably already troubled kid out to dry in the media wouldn't be very constructive.
Re:Still thinking? (Score:2, Informative)
For Safeway, you don't even need the card -- just the phone number the card is associated with. I lost my card ages ago, but just put in the phone number I had when I got the card, and I get my discounts and my purchases tracked. It works all over the U.S. as I have done this in many states.
Re:Still thinking? (Score:2, Informative)
Most stores will let you provide the phone number in lieu of the actual card. Security is not generally much of a concern, as each usage only benefits the card owner ... it doesn't cost them anything (except when the data is misinterpreted by law enforcement, as was in this case, or other parties, such as your health or life insurance provider who thinks you are buying ... and eating ... too much cholesterol laden, heart artery clogging, foods).
I've never applied for, nor received, any of these cards. I
Re:Still thinking? (Score:3, Insightful)
How did they get the safeway info?? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How did they get the safeway info?? (Score:2)
I believe that there are some restrictions on what you're able to access, though I'm not entirely sure on what these are. There's a lot more to the act though, and anybody interested can look here [informatio...ner.gov.uk]
Re:How did they get the safeway info?? (Score:2)
Re:How did they get the safeway info?? (Score:5, Informative)
Happy ending? (Score:5, Insightful)
He was charged with and arrested for arson.
What part of this story is "happy"?
The only thing that stood between him and serious prison time (not to mention probably losing all of his friends, family and destroying his career and reputation) was that the criminal who was responsible came forward. Do you know how rare that is? His "fortune" here was like falling off a 110 story building and having a huge gust of wind on a still day scoop you to safety at the very last second.
Let's not even entertain the possibility that someone could have died in the fire. If that were the case, I bet nobody would have stepped forward and this guy would have taken the fall - all so Safeway could target their demographics better. More, he probably would have been sentenced to life in prison at the least and everyone would be cheering for his execution. Because, of course, he's guilty if he has been convited, so he should fry!
This was a stomach-churning close-call.
Re:Happy ending? (Score:2)
He's not in prison?
Close call? (Score:5, Insightful)
This was a stomach-churning close-call.
I guess I have more faith in the system.
They'd have to convince a jury that this "noble, hard working volunteer firefighter who loves his adoring family very much and just, out of the kindness of his own heart, adopted a child into his home and family", started a fire to kill them all.
And apparently they planned on doing it with nothing but circumstantial evidence which would vanish once a trial started. Any defense lawyer worth a damn is going to have a Safeway employee on the stand explaining several different ways someone could use his Safeway Club Card #.
Re:Close call? (Score:4, Insightful)
There's the conviction right there. The prosecuter brings in an FBI profiler who points out that firefighters are the first ones they check out when they're looking for an arsonist.
Most firefighters are good, hardworking folks. But the profession (and it is, whether you get paid or volunteer) also attracts those who have an unhealthy fascination with fire or those who are driven by internal demons.
Re:Close call? (Score:3, Interesting)
That's not necessarily the case. For example, a relatively local fire department, wishing a new fire hall, decided that burning down the fire hall was the solution. Failing the first time, they tried again.
In a lot of cases, it's not the fascination with fire, but the need to be a hero.
In others, where th
Re:Close call? (Score:3, Informative)
It might be "circumstantial" evidence, but never put it past the power of a jury to do the most fucked up stupid things imaginable.
Very Close Call IMHO (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't.
Here in Illinois, 50% of those on death row were proven by genetic analysis to be innocent of the crimes of which they had been convicted.
50%.
One in two people sentenced to death had been wrongly convicted, and were only exonerated pre-mortem because they happen to have enough appeals in place to postpone their executions until a technology came along able to prove they weren't the culprits. These people were in some cases convicted on evidence a hell of a lot more flimsy than a Safeway Club Card purchasing record, and they were sentenced to die.
The numbers were so horrific that our Governor at the time, a Republican who until then had supported the death penalty, placed a moratorium on all further executions in the state, and rightly so.
Of course, this "new" technology, like any other, is falable, and in a case like this one (where everything's gone up in smoke, and where the accused lived there anyway) entirely inapplicable, so lest someone think "but now we have this new panacea, so it won't happen anymore" I can only say, don't kid yourself.
Justice in America is appallingly hap-hazard. Police are lazy. They latch onto a theory they like and make the facts fit their expectations. The lose, damage, and misinterpret evidence all the time. District Attorney's persue careers based on rates of conviction, and often have little concern for the actual guilt or innocence of those they are convicting (there have been a couple in recent memory here in Chicago who have been proven to knowingly convict innocent people, in at least one case because he was more interested in putting the scapegoat behind bars and looking good to an angry public than in serving justice).
Having served on a couple of juries, I can say from my own experience that juries are faced with severely filtered and diluted information, outright misinformation, and a great deal of emotional manipulation from both sides. Their odds of getting something right don't seem to be much higher than what we would get if we simply flipped a coin to determine guilt or innocence.
I understand people who break and run when accused of a crime they didn't commit. The prisons are full of people wrongly convicted, and the streets with people who got away scot-free (and of course the opposite is also true, the prisons are also full of guilty people correctly convicted, and the streets with people justly acquited). It is an utter crapshoot as to whether or not you are correctly found guilty or notguilty, or incorrectly found notguilty or guilty, and this guy got incredibly lucky.
Re:Very Close Call IMHO (Score:3, Informative)
The number exonerated went to 13 when Gov. Ryan put a moratorium on the death penalty, and ultimately commuted the sentences of everyone on death ro
Re:Close call? (Score:3, Informative)
A smart defense attorney should have been able to point that out.
Now, if Safeway had video surveilance of everyeone that purchased something, and could link the picture to the transaction, then there'd be evidence. Lacking that, the use of a discount card, especially at safeway, is useless as proof that someone did something.
Re:Happy ending? (Score:5, Insightful)
Uh, that and an actual trial and conviction, then. Yes.
You're assuming here that the guy would have been found guilty. Which you would think is a big assumption, given that he in fact was innocent.
Innocent people are put trial every day. It's not a pleasant thing, but it's the only way the system can work, unless we somehow attain police and procecutors who never make mistakes.
But it's not just the procecutors. Courts make mistakes too, which is why you have the right to appeal. Depite all that, innocent people sometimes do get convicted. And that's the real tragedy, although it seems it more often has to do with incompetent defense lawyers (It'd be nice if the state provided people who could stay awake [sanluisobispo.com]).
But as I said, this was nowhere near a close call.
Re:Happy ending? (Score:5, Informative)
Not Just the Media (Score:5, Insightful)
That was not the case here, but even if you're not in jail, the prospect of jail is a very stressful and disruptive experience: You need to appear in court multiple times, and perhaps pay for lawyers and bail. It also destroys relationships and careers, so it's really a problem with society as a whole.
Re:Happy ending? (Score:3, Interesting)
If the evidence against someone leaves the defendant without a shadow of a doubt guilty, b
What issue? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:What issue? (Score:2, Insightful)
Remember, he was CHARGED. You would hope the police would have figured it out before CHARGING him.
Do you k
Re:What issue? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What issue? (Score:2)
Re:What issue? (Score:2)
Re:What issue? (Score:2)
That said, I am sick to death of all the stores that ask for your phone number when you buy something. Once an auto parts store (at the dealer, no less) let me walk out without buying the part I needed because I refused to give them my name, address, and phone number. Several years ago I invented a number that I give in all such cases. I've even gone into stores where I wasn't sure I'd been before
Re:What issue? (Score:2)
The fact that it's voluntary is not the issue. The issue is that you don't kow what they're doing with the information they gather, and it seems you have no control over it.
Re:What issue? (Score:2, Insightful)
Says someone who wasn't imprisoned for life.
Yeah let's just take our Prozac tell ourselves everything is good this way. Life in general is meant to be spent in a cell; it's just the way of things.
Those police, unlike all the other police in history and every court case known to man and without any precedent, would have proven he's innocent, instead of adding him to the overflowing prisons full of everyone else who was in a similar situation.
Re:What issue? (Score:2)
If the system was perfect then we could do away with trials, lawyers and judges and just shoot the criminals.
Re:What issue? (Score:2, Insightful)
Trust me, when it happens to you, you WILL feel wronged. You see, when they arrest you, they will do it in one of two ways. If you're lucky they'll get you when you're alone, with noone around to witness them brutalizing you. If you're unlucky, they'll get you at work, school, in front of your children, or some other humiliating situat
Re:What issue? (Score:2)
I suspect this is the Children... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I suspect this is the Children... (Score:2)
the dog pointed the house as the place where the firestarter went, too.
guesswork policework is shit, if you need privacy to cover your ass from polices who guess who did it and then make up the evidence.. then you already need a change of scene, no amount of privacy would help.
A recent story from the UK (Score:5, Informative)
A magistrate who found a £3,250 Rolex watch in a supermarket and gave it to his wife as a 60th birthday present was fined £600 after being found guilty of theft.
Rowlett, a building surveyor, was caught almost two years later after taking the watch for repair at a jewellers near his home in Poole.
It was identified from its serial number as having been lost or stolen.
Inquiries with Tesco, through its Club Card loyalty scheme records, and receipts of purchases showed Rowlett had been in the shop within two hours of Mrs ScottRe:A recent story from the UK (Score:2)
Re:A recent story from the UK (Score:2)
If he doesn't appeal or loses the appeal then he is "expected to resign".
Card Sharing @ Safeway (Score:2, Interesting)
This Has Been Well Documented (Score:3, Interesting)
The emphasis is mine.
Fly-buys is a large loyalty scheme in Australia. AUSTRAC are the spooks responsible for tracing money as it flows through the economy.
Basically, the government is well aware of the abilty of loyalty schemes to trace otherwise untraceable cash transactions, and they would rather the public didn't know about it (as proven by the bungled attempt at censorship).
Ob Privacy reminder (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Ob Privacy reminder (Score:2)
I take the 'overwhelmed by data' approach. Here in the UK, you cannot avoid being seen in high quality colour in just about any built-up area or mall. We are the most watched country in the world. Yet crime has not
Re:Ob Privacy reminder (Score:2)
"Covering you supermarket card with tin foil keeps Big Brother from detecting it's presence, therefore buying you a significant measure of safety."
Meh. Not bad for 0542 in the morning if you ask me...
Anonymous card (Score:2, Informative)
So why use real info? (Score:2)
Re:So why use real info? (Score:2)
Same thing with DNA tests (Score:2, Interesting)
I could get a few hairs from someone, murder his wife, spread his hairs all over the place and the police would most probably think it was him (he was in his bed sleeping at home with nobody to witness)
BUT ITS just
Re:Same thing with DNA tests (Score:2)
My guess is that they're probably on his wife anyway. You'd need something more conclusive like fingerprints I suspect.
If only there was something you could do.... (Score:2)
Oh, wait! There IS [aclu.org]
Remember this... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you should ever find yourself on a jury. Chances are, had this gone to trial, he would've been convicted, and be in jail right now.
All the evidence is circumstantial and really pretty flimsy. The dog circling to the front door? Well of course he's going to detect that the family was in their own yard. While from movies we get these impressions of "superdogs" that do police work, in reality, such dogs are quite prone to make mistakes.
So his club card (not, apparently, his credit card-examine what's NOT said. The credit card would've been far stronger evidence. Had he used that, they would've worried about getting evidence from that and not even been concerned with the club card.) was used to make the purchases. So what? I signed up for my club card with bogus information. Sometimes, I forget the card, and I have no idea what BS phone number I put down, so I use my boss's phone #. He must have one of those cards, it always works. But I've certainly never been asked to verify my identity when doing so.
The real moral of this story-cops and prosecutors are often overzealous. When you are on a jury, do not ask yourself "Does it look like this guy did it?" Ask yourself instead "Has it been proven to me, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this person did it? Would I stake x years of my life on the fact that this guy did it?" Because you are staking years of someone's life on your decision. If you cannot say "I am sure"-even if you can say "I'm almost sure"-the vote is not guilty. Even if the other 11 say otherwise. Stick it out and hang the jury if you have to, but do NOT condemn a person guilty unless you are ABSOLUTELY sure. People are exonerated every day because some jury thought "probably did it" equated to "for-sure did it."
How hard is it to find the same brand. (Score:2)
Re:How hard is it to find the same brand. (Score:2)
most important question (Score:2)
I would suggest not doing it in his house!
I know DBA's in the industry - Just so you know... (Score:5, Informative)
The only way to make bogus data work, name address, etc. is to use cash 100% of the time.
The moment you tie a member card to a transaction paid by cheque, debit card or whatever, there is now a link between you and the card. From that moment on, that card, bogus data or not, will be linked to you.
That's why many stores don't care if you fill out the application using the name Micky Mouse then you turn around and pay by debit card or cheque. Or a store manager upon asking will give you a card without filling out an application and then you turn around and pay by cheque. The minute the transaction is processed, your profile, the cards data, is updated with the new information.
There's not just one name linked to a card either. Swap with friends and all that does is link another name to the card. They still have records of this person bought this and this other person bought that.
My local store, if all you tell them is you forgot your card, they say no problem and the cashier scans a store card kept at the register. So what? As long as you pay by anything other than cash, a new transaction is created that can be cross referenced back to you. You don't think for a minute that debit card numbers, bank account numbers etc. are *not* part of the member card transaction record?
Member cards were a solution to group transactions by cross reference. One household may have 6-7 methods of paying. One couple has seperate checking accounts, their own credit/debit cards, that's four methods right there. Add different credit cards and now a household may have 7 ways to pay. Member cards were introduced only to help group these transactions into a larger household picture. Household demographics is what they're after, "household" is the holy grail of demographics.
They lost this household demographic when they started to accepted plastic as payment. Ever notice member cards were not introduced until stores started taking CC/Debit cards for payments? They've been tracking purchases for 30 years. Back then, joint checking accounts were common and paying by cheque was the only method other than cash. Back then household demographics was a simplier excerise. It's worth a few cents off an inflated price to incurage you to help them group these new plastic transactions by household.
So, except that the government has caught on that this can be a wealth of information, this is nothing new. Unless you use cash 100% of the time you're not beating the system the way you think you are by filling out the application with false data.
Re:I dont get it (Score:5, Informative)
Well, for one thing, the member card provides a link between credit card purchases (which have your personal info) and cash purchases (which would normally be anonymous). If you even once use a credit/debit card with your member card all of your previous and future purchases with that member card are then related to your name & address.
"All I can think of is that somehow the act of getting a member card is an authorization for them to collect that information."
Yes, among other things. Not that anybody ever reads these agreements, but it also gives them the right to sell your name and address, usually.
Insurance implications of Loyalty cards. (Score:5, Interesting)
- you apply for health insurance;
- your insurer looks up your loyalty card records, and says "I see you've been buying fatty foods, pizza, chips, chocolate. "
- same insurer checks your credit card records: "I see no Gym payments here, you don't work out, do you?"
- "At least you don't smoke, then we'd refuse to insure you at all."
- "OK, we can insure you, it will just cost you much more, because of your lifestyle. We will use any excuse to charge you more."
The same goes for life insurance, or car insurance if you are noted buying alcohol.
I know about the UK Data Protection Act and similar EU laws (I'm a Brit living in Ireland) - I've had people tell me not to worry, this can't happen, the law prevents it. Yes, they do - today - but these laws were put in place by politicians, and can be nullified just as easily, if an apparent reason emerges.
Example: in the UK, what if the Health Secretary is told that prioritizing NHS treatment in this way will save £billions? There goes your legal protection. It might not need to go to a Parliament vote, with the powers (s)he already has. Checking your records for apparent negligence on your part is a lot cheaper than putting you through a physical examination, right?
Re:Insurance implications of Loyalty cards. (Score:3, Insightful)
First, they'll have an opt-in program where you submit evidence of your 'healthy' lifestyle, citing supermarket card tracking permission and such, in exchange, they'll be some sort of healthy living discount/rebate.
After it becomes widespread, they
Re:Insurance implications of Loyalty cards. (Score:3, Insightful)
a. live more healthy
b. pay more money
This would kill the obesity problem. The only thing that ever affects people is money.
The problem as always just lies in the implementation. If you buy your vegetables at the
.com wet dream (Score:2)
Anonymity Is Just An Illusion You're A Celeb (Score:4, Funny)
Not just the government uses this data (Score:5, Interesting)
Some examples:
-A large chain of grocery stores that also had pharmacys sold the data about what medications their customers bought to an insurance company. The insurance company ran the medication list against each policy holder's health insurance info and then cancelled people who bought drugs like heart medication without the insurance company being aware of it.
-Another chain had a promotion tied to their loyalty cards that gave customers a turkey for Thanksgiving based on how much they spent and it also gave them more stuff is they bought specific things. When the statement of exactly what was purchased came to the chain's CEO's home, it revealed to his wife that he bought huge amounts of flowers for his mistress and it resulted in his divorce.
-A single mother who had just lost her young son in a car accident bought some baby gifts in a chain grocery store and used her frequent shopper card when she paid in order to get a small discount. The purchases of these items caused her to be flagged as a new mother and be immediately put on a ton of mailing lists relating to "the joy of motherhood", etc. Hardly a pleasant reminder after losing her only child.
I guess that my point in posting this is that the privacy issues with these cards are quite far reaching. They can have real personal impact and their use should be considered VERY CAREFULLY. They can have benefits that one might find valuable, but they can have devistating and totally unforseen consequences.
Caviat Carrier?
The real issue here (Score:4, Interesting)
- You could be accused of crime based almost solely on things you bought at the store. The dude put out the fire and called 911. Not exactly a bright arsonist, now is he? I blame the prosecutors as much as the cops. Who looks at a shopping receipt and a tracking dog and thinks they have a case against the person who put the fire out? And the dude was a fire fighter. You'd think someone with intimate knowledge of the business could come up with something that isn't going to leave as much evidence behind.
- Once information about you exists somewhere it can be used for things you might not be able to envision at the time you turned the information over. You bought kerosene for a space heater, fertilzer for your lawn, some batteries and a spare garage door opener because your wife's car is a purse on wheels and she lost it. Then one day Homeland Security is showing up at your door. Unfortunately that's not unreasonably paranoid these days.
Still think you have nothing to hide? What's really pathetic is that people who really know trade craft and are willing to actually do something bad with those materials also know how to make it difficult to track their purchases. If they have an organized network some of those materials may have been purchased months or years previously by middle buyers now long gone who had no idea why they were buying two tons of fertilizer a few bags at a time.
Here's a tip. (Score:4, Insightful)
Trust me, getting caught won't justify the $0.30 savings you got on the matches and lighter fluid.
I don't know who's stupider: An arsonist who actually used a shopper's club card, or the police for assuming the arsonist was so stupid as to use a shopper's club card (and not to frame someone else). You would THINK the latter would be one of the first hypotheses entertained by the police before they go off and charge the guy whose name is attached to the card.
Goddamnit. (Score:3, Insightful)
I've been saying for years that investigative techniques for computer crime are insufficient - maybe it's across the board.
Think it would help if we pulled shows like CSI and Law&Order off the air?
Supermarket card "evidence" is a joke (Score:5, Insightful)
- You don't need to present a shred of identification to get a card -- you don't even have to give the right address, since they give it to you right when you apply for it.
- You don't even need an actual card -- stores will allow you to enter a phone number in place of swiping the card -- and there's no way for them to know if you enter the right number.
If this was critical evidence in their case, they didn't have a case. (In which case, it's no surprise they jumped on the 3rd party who came forward to confess).Re:Supermarket card "evidence" is a joke (Score:3, Insightful)
Circumstatial Evidence is often pretty thin (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's a tip.. (Score:3, Insightful)
And they don't even know that I exist.
Ultimate shopper, ultimate crime? (Score:3, Funny)
hrm (Score:3, Funny)
i was quite interested until i realized my mistake...now it's just boring arson.
Re:Your Rights Online?? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Your Rights Online?? (Score:3, Interesting)
Which is why I used a fake name and address when I signed up for my loyalty cards.
I've never seen any supermarket employee ask for ID when you fill out a loyalty card application. If anything, the employees are completely indifferent about letting customers borrow each others' cards, and will even provide spare cards of their own for customer who forget theirs.
Just use a fake name and address that are
Re:Your Rights Online?? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Your Rights Online?? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Your Rights Online?? (Score:2)
I signed up for a kroger card with a completely fake name and address, but used it with my credit card. 6 months later, I started getting packages of kroger coupons in the mail with my name and my address.
Coincidence?
(As a side note, it seems that someone else is using my account somehow... the "promotions" they run always seem to be inflated, like recently they offered a gift certificate if you spent something like $400 in a month, and when I went for the first time that month, my
Re:Your Rights Online?? (Score:2, Insightful)
you get some measly shopping vouchers or gifts not worth their value
and the shop gets to target its market better
while they log exactly what you buy
which leads to this guy in this case, being screwed by this opt-in gathered infomation.
Makes pulling out those loyalty cards out of your wallet so encouraging huh?
Re:Use a fake name (Score:2)
Re:Use a fake name (Score:2)
maybe not (Score:2)
Re:Ils sont fou ces américains! (Score:2)