Borders Books Customers, Watch For Database Opt-Out Email 88
An anonymous reader writes "That email you might be getting from Barnes and Noble might not be spam, but rather your only chance to prevent the comprehensive record of your buying history at defunct arch-rival Borders from ending up in B&N's data warehouse. You have15 days after the email arrives, assuming that it ever does, since chances are the email address you originally signed up with Borders is long gone." For that very reason, this sounds like a good place for the terms of the bankruptcy to require opting in, rather than opting out.
Re: (Score:1)
Better be careful. There are some militant liberals around here. Talking like that can get you in trouble with the though police. I might agree with you, but is it worth risking being sent to Guantanamo for reeducation? I don't think so. Just keep your anti-gay thoughts to yourself, man, or they'll have you brainwashed within the year!
Re: (Score:3)
Why can't somebody be more fair and balanced?
Oh, wait, of course; because there is
Re: (Score:2)
without their consent
You consent when you clicked the "I agree" button while signing up. I agree that this is a shitty deal, and we live in a time where you can't buy a pack of tictacs without signing away basic rights and something should be done about this ... but lets not delude ourselves.
against having their personal information sold to who-the-fuck-knows who
That pretty much happens all the time. That's why I was kind of surprised when this became a news item. And again, not saying it's not a bad thing, just saying it has kind of become the norm. You have to try pretty damn hard to not do busin
Re: (Score:2)
You consent when you clicked the "I agree" button while signing up.
I know this is the state of the world and of the law, but I don't think it's Right. My armchair understanding of contract law is that a contract is only valid when the parties have a "meeting of the minds". If I click a checkbox without reading a contract, then plainly there is no meeting of the minds. Furthermore, even if I DO read it, I'm not a lawyer thus cannot possibly understand it, and thus plainly there is no meeting of the minds. The only "contract" which does not require a meeting of the minds is
Re: (Score:2)
This is largely my view.
In general, I don't think people should have to make legal agreements every time they buy something. There should be a set of common laws that dictate the saner of the stuff found in every agreement, and probably some give n` take on the other stuff. Once in place, business and consumers should implicitly be bound by these rules. Any extra agreement, as you say, should involve a lawyer.. not a button. If a business can't operate within the terms that society dictates, and their custo
Re: (Score:1)
You do realize that if you didn't agree to a contract, Borders could have just done anything they wanted with the data, right? Like sell it repeatedly to spammers? Or post it on billboards? (I love the fact you think 'The law applies' would help here.)
However, Borders couldn't have sent email to anyone, because that requires consent, and you've just decided to blow up contract law so no one can consent to anything, ever. Neither can Borders actually sell you stuff, because they can't charge your credit car
Re: (Score:2)
No. I don't realize that. I realize that if I didn't agree to a contract, Borders would do with my data what the law allows, which is a lot LESS than what their contract stipulates.
Re: (Score:2)
Really?
Would you like to point what what law, exactly, stops someone from selling your address, phone number, books you've bought, etc?
Because I don't know what universe you live in, but such laws do not exist in America.
Re: (Score:2)
Well gosh, I guess I can do your research for you. I'm a bit busy, but you can start here:
http://www.privacy.ca.gov/privacy_laws.htm [ca.gov]
http://www.ftc.gov/privacy/glbact/glbsub1.htm [ftc.gov]
http://www.law.state.ak.us/department/civil/consumer/4548.html [state.ak.us]
http://government.dc.gov/DC/Government/Data+&+Transparency/Consumer+Protection/Consumer+Information+101/Consumer+Personal+Information+Security+Breach+Notification+Act [dc.gov]
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca_toc/30_14_17.htm [mt.gov]
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/1349.19 [ohio.gov]
http://www.cdt.org/pr [cdt.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, idiot, none of that has the slightest bit to do with what we're talking about. Google 'privacy laws' does not magically make them relevant the conversation.
The first link is a overview of California law, none of which is relevant. The second link is for banks. The third link is about security breaches and social security numbers, as is, obviously, the fourth link. The fifth is about identity theft. The sixth is about security breaches.
The seventh, interestingly, is about the few specific laws on that
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for moving the goalpost, now I can ignore you in good conscience.
Re: (Score:2)
From my original post:
Would you like to point what what law, exactly, stops someone from selling your address, phone number, books you've bought, etc?
From my newest post:
Now, SHOW ME WHERE A LAW COVERS BOOK PURCHASES, or shut the hell up and stop pretending random google searches prove your point.
Yeah, I sure 'moved the goal posts', you idiot.
The law forbids no one from selling your name. The law forbids no one from selling your address. The law forbids no one from selling your book purchases. Hell,
Re: (Score:2)
Technically, a contract has two elements. First is offer and acceptance, and the other is consideration.
The offer Borders made was to sell you a book at a certain price AND to agree to whatever other terms ("I agree to -terms-"). By purchasing the product, you've agreed to the terms of the sale (offer and acceptance).
The consideration part is interesting, because contracts for no money exchange (or exchange of goods of value) aren't valid (it's why you have contracts saying you agree to pay $1). That happen
Re: (Score:2)
But to be "accepted", don't you have to have a "meeting of the minds"? (I don't know the answer to that; IANAL.) If I click a checkbox saying I read a contract, but I didn't actually read the contract, then no reasonable person could say that I did in fact read and understand the contract. For instance, when I bought my house, a human being sat me down in a room and went through the mortgage document with me paragraph-by-paragraph and explained it and had me sign it on each page.
Here's what Wiki says:
Meeting of the minds (also referred to as mutual agreement, mutual assent or consensus ad idem) is a phrase in contract law used to describe the intentions of the parties forming the contract. In particular it refers to the situation where there is a common understanding in the formation of the contract. This condition or element is often considered a necessary requirement to the formation of a contract.
That l
Re: (Score:2)
I consented to Borders. Not whomever scarfs the data up after Borders goes TU.
The agreement you consented to explicitly gave them permission to give your data to other parties they do business with, are bought by, or merge with. Was spelled right out (and is in a depressingly large number of similar agreements). Should it be legal.. hell no.. but it's reality.
Re: (Score:2)
You did consent. You just didn't read the agreement you made with Borders fully if you think you didn't.
Re: (Score:1)
Oh, please. If people had given a crap that they might be tied to their purchases, they wouldn't have tied themselves to their purchases in the first place. Nobody forces you to get a Borders card. Nobody forces you to give any kind of accurate information that they can track back to you. My mom has never had a problem with saying "I don't have an email address" even though it is complete bunk, just because she doesn't want people (or retailers) emailing her.
The idea that people are out there going "O
Re: (Score:3)
The rest are nerds on sites like Slashdot pretending that they represent any kind of majority opinion
Well, okay, but just to be clear, I think the nerds on Slashdot are making the argument that segmenting data with opt-in is the Right thing to do even if it is not the Popular thing to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Quite so. The majority usually won't care, even if not caring today can mean major problems decades down the road. They depend on others giving a fsck.
As Plato noted, democracy only works as long as the demos are educated and take an interest.
Re: (Score:2)
Totally agreed. In very similar ways, I count on other people caring about feeding starving Africans, fighting against human rights abuses in Iran and China, building housing projects in Atlanta, prosecuting wars in Afghanistan -- pretty much everything. I do have opinions on those matters, I just don't feel them strongly enough to do much about them, aside from vote. I happen to be the kind of person who cares about the effects of copyrights and the legal ramifications of click-though licenses, so I do a s
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, wait, of course; because there is no "other side" to this story, just customers getting shafted.
Shafting the customers seems to be SOP these days.
Service doesn't seem to be an issue, because the competition doesn't give that either, so now competition is defined in terms of who can shaft the customers the best.
--
Ben Dover.
Re: (Score:2)
so now competition is defined in terms of who can shaft the customers the best.
Yup. Best quote on this I've heard (and have no idea where it is from and am paraphrasing from fuzzy memory):
"the biggest deciding factor on who to do business with is who uses the best lube."
Re: (Score:2)
If you're trying to make a blanket, universal declaration, yes it's evil. In this specific context, though, you have the database of a worldwide book retailer bought by another one that's more or less equivalent, who plans to use it for more or less the exact same purpose in the same way as Borders.
Now, things might be different if the mailing list were purchased by some religious group who planned to scour it for "unwholesome" purchases to identify "sinners" and make their lives miserable... and that's why
Re: (Score:2)
The New Reformed Church of Jesus Christ the Vengeful Redeemer operates a summer camp in Greenville, Mississippi. But, the church is actually located across the river, in Arkansas. And, yes, all the kids at summer camp happen to look like muppets. That is one of the dangers of inbreeding, after all. Where do you think Jim Henson got all his ideas, anyway?
What's with the profanity? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Interestingly, I find over-the-top "you must be a moron if you don't agree with my opinion" type sarcasm puts me off reading someones argument (even when I generally agree with it) way faster than bad language. Language just adds emphasis, whereas the sarcasm shows a blatant one-sided mindset... and it just rubs me the wrong way.
Re: (Score:3)
They can't even make a point without proffering the most offensive slurs against Christianity. You want polite? Go to Trees and Things. [trresandthings.com]
To be fair, they are mostly ACs. What do you expect, since they are ashamed of themselves and largely spew so they can respond back and forth.
Re: (Score:3)
There's also the fact that I have a nook already, so any data B&N can glean from buying my data is just the few books I bought from Borders instead of them. Not really a big deal to most people who frequent bookstores. Most have purchased items at both retailers.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really a big deal to most people who frequent bookstores. Most have purchased items at both retailers.
This needs points. At first I thought to myself, "Hrm, I probably already deleted that email. Damn."
Then I thought to myself, "Wait, B&N already has an entry for me. Heck they probably have MORE on me since my Borders purchases tended to be in-store while B&N was online."
So...yeah...even if I opted out, nothing would come of it.
Glad I Never Signed Up (Score:2)
I always knew there was a reason I never gave Borders SHIT when they asked. And boy, did they ever ask. More like DEMAND.
Re: (Score:2)
If you'd just provide your home telephone number and email address, I'll be happy to reply to your post in a meaningful way.
I wonder if my Borders Reward Points, along with my personal information, will transfer to B&N. At least that would be something.
Does it really matter? (Score:2)
I realize the importance of the general principle here (that companies shouldn't be allowed to treat customer db's as assets). But as a practical matter in this case, does it really matter? Is Barnes and Noble knowing my book buying history any different than Borders knowing it? If I were so paranoid about B&N knowing it, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have bought on Borders under my real name in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, its all a bit stupid. The main point was that borders agreed to not sell your information to anyone. Well, they also promised to pay their suppliers money for the goods and services provided. In a bankruptcy, the judge ends up deciding who's promises are kept and at what level. It should not be a surprise to anyone that these lists could be sold in the case of a bankruptcy. In fact, I'd argue people should be thankful that they ended up in the hands of barns and nobles, rather than Jim's discount orga
Re: (Score:2)
Opting In? (Score:2)
"For that very reason, this sounds like a good place for the terms of the bankruptcy to require opting in, rather than opting out."
This makes no sense? Why would anybody op in for more marketing?
On a side note, Borders in in bankruptcy. That means the judge gets to void any contract they like and sell any asset they like - like marketing lists. If we want to address this, it needs to be addressed at the Federal level.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't market to me. Does this really need to be explained?
The only explanation the marketing company needs is that they paid $10 to get 10k email address, so if even one of them buys a book they're in great shape.
They can be guaranteed someone will respond in a group that large. As much as I identify with your position, unless humans change overnight and every single person suddenly acts like you, the marketers will continue to have incentive to spam. Either that or a revolution that destroys the social relations that give incentive to marketing, but such an uphea
Re: (Score:2)
How about signing up for marketing information so you get 30% off all your purchases at a retailer? Seems good to me. That's what I got out of giving Borders my info.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would anybody op in for more marketing?
I can't answer this question, but as someone who is regularly tasked with fixing technical bits of online sweepstakes, I certainly can tell you that people do opt-in for marketing with valid email, phone number, and home address in great quantities. The prizes are unimpressive and the odds of winning are astronomical, but people still sign up.
I guess there's always some incentive there, and in this case the incentive will be something as small as the chance to receive great offers from esteemed partners. Ma
Re: (Score:2)
I've won twice online for things (CPU & Mobo from AMD and an HDTV). So my relatives regularly want me to sign up for things thinking I somehow am more lucky then them.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would anybody op in for more marketing?
Uh, presumably because they want it.
And if there is some thing which nobody ever wants, then why would we live in a world where that thing is so incredibly common while at the same time being so easy to get rid of?
Listen, people: if we don't want to be surrounded by advertising all the time, we don't have to be. If we want to, we could get rid of most of it with a few simple changes to the law.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would anybody op in for more marketing?
I can't speak for everybody, but I personally have signed up for a couple of mailing lists of publishers. Of course I haven't given them any true personal data, and the email that they have is a long, unique address under my own domain.
I signed up because I'm interested in books of these genres and it doesn't bother me to have Thunderbird filter and file those emails into a certain folder. Then when I have nothing better to do I can go through the new announce
URL: www.bn.com/borders (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So wait. To get out of turning your email address over to B&N you have to give your email address to B&N? ** Holds hand up **
Anyway there's nothing one-sided about this. You are perfectly free to make a list of all of the companies that do business with you and sell the list to whoever you like.
Re: (Score:2)
Jokes on B&N, they already HAVE my email address!!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
B&N isn't some faceless entity using Windows machines with worms on them to relay their spam. If you get mail from them after opting out, then you could pursue damages under CAN-SPAM.
(queue a cynical response about B&N being no different, and instead selling the info to a subsidiary or something)
buying history (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Uhm no, it's not an "asset", it's a limited license to use your personal data for some purposes. The judge suddenly decided that the license from _you_, a third party to the bankruptcy, can be somehow extended without your consent.
Re: (Score:2)
can be somehow extended without your consent.
Unfortunately, you do consent when you click the "I Agree" button. It was clearly stated in their terms that your data would be given to other companies if they merged or where bought.
It sucks that we can't buy anything these days without signing these kind of mostly one sides "you have little choice" type agreements.. but it's reality.
Re: (Score:2)
My guess is that the judge "suddenly decided" that way because the terms of the program license as well as the governing law determined the decision. I'm not a lawyer, though, and I haven't read this case either.
Re: (Score:2)
EVERY "agree to click" thing includes terms about your first born and so on. The problem is, the enforcement is uneven. If the law decided that every single term is valid (and also, shouldn't be left "just in case"), it would be almost as good since people would have to actually read click-throughs.
Fortunately, on my current side of the pond, personal data cannot be so trivially sold. I almost did end up on yours, though, so I'm scared about how things are.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah. I wish the law were different, but it's not. What country are you from, which protects you so?
I hope you don't say Britain; I'd rather live in a country where B&N can buy Borders' customer records, than a theocratic monarchy where government cameras watch over me while I don't have the free-speech rights to call quacks out for their nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, no. Its an asset. How do I know its an asset? Because B&N was willing to pay money for it. That makes it an asset. I'm sure other stake holders like vendors wanted the money borders agreed to pay them too. The judges' job is to figure out how to break promises AND contracts in the most fair and equitable way.
Re: (Score:2)
So if I want to pay money for a slice of your heart (so I can cook it), would a judge help me with it?
Permission to use that data belongs to a third party (the customers), so it didn't belong to Borders in the first place (they had only a limited one with non-disclosure). No matter if someone promises me that slice of your heart, there is no way a sane law would enforce that promise on you, as this was not a part of any contract you made.
Re: (Score:2)
Great analogy! Its just like when your head explodes in a black hole the brain turns into a 66 Chevy! Color me convinced!
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure there are markets where you could sell that heart, and the illegality of it probably makes that asset worth a lot more. So yes, still an asset.
The data is encumbered with non-disclosure (Score:2)
Which makes it a LIABILITY for Borders, as far as I'm concerned.
Got mine last week. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Funny how they discount real books that you own, but not the _license_ you buy to read an ebook, which often is just a few bucks less than the real thing.
URLs and email from B&B (Score:5, Informative)
Full text of the aforementioned email from B&N below.
Dear Borders Customer,
My name is William Lynch, CEO of Barnes & Noble, and I'm writing to you today on behalf of the entire B&N team to make you aware of important information regarding your Borders account.
First of all let me say Barnes & Noble uniquely appreciates the importance bookstores play within local communities, and we're very sorry your Borders store closed.
As part of Borders ceasing operations, we acquired some of its assets including Borders brand trademarks and their customer list. The subject matter of your DVD and other video purchases will be part of the transferred information. The federal bankruptcy court approved this sale on September 26, 2011.
Our intent in buying the Borders customer list is simply to try and earn your business. The majority of our stores are within close proximity to former Borders store locations, and for those that aren't, we offer our award- winning NOOK digital reading devices that provide a bookstore in your pocket. We are readers like you, and hope that through our stores, NOOK devices, and our bn.com online bookstore we can win your trust and provide you with a place to read and shop.
It's important for you to understand however you have the absolute right to opt-out of having your customer data transferred to Barnes & Noble. If you would like to opt-out, we will ensure all your data we receive from Borders is disposed of in a secure and confidential manner. Please visit www.bn.com/borders before October 15, 2011 to do so.
Should you choose not to opt-out by October 15, 2011, be assured your information will be covered under the Barnes & Noble privacy policy, which can be accessed at www.bn.com/privacy. B&N will maintain any of your data according to this policy and our strict privacy standards.
At Barnes & Noble we share your love of books — whatever shape they take. We also take our responsibility to service communities by providing a local bookstore very seriously. In the coming weeks, assuming you don't opt-out, you'll be hearing from us with some offers to encourage you to shop our stores and try our NOOK products. We hope you'll give us a chance to be your bookstore.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I got the email as well. It's remarkably reasonable (at least as much as it can be with an opt-out system, and they wouldn't have bought the data if it was strictly opt-in because it wouldn't make business sense). Note that the section on how to opt-out is bolded in the original.
B&N already had my email so it's a moot point for me.
Seriously...this is an issue? (Score:2)
OMG...they went bankrupt and sold a portion of their company to...to...to...um the other big box book store.
Um, gee, considering 90% of those who went to Borders also frequently B&N. Is this really an issue. Yes, I am sure there is that rare handful of people who were so offending by the fact that B&N put Glenn Beck's book on a front stand that they vowed never to do business with B&N again.
But seriously, for most book reading folks. We're not bothered. And heck, we're waiting for that 40% off o
Re: (Score:2)
Some may fear the barista at the B&N Starbucks will now know the consumer was "cheating" on her with the barista of the Border's... coffee spot place... and that now she will never give them her phone number and miss any chance of dating her! :P
Re: (Score:2)
Some may fear the barista at the B&N Starbucks will now know the consumer was "cheating" on her with the barista of the Border's... coffee spot place... and that now she will never give them her phone number and miss any chance of dating her! :P
The Borders coffee place was Seattle's Best, at least at my local Borders... which, of course, is owned by Starbucks. So you were basically cheating on her with her sister. Well, maybe half sister.
Hot, like coffee.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, this is somewhat stupid.
People signed up to get notifications about email books from Borders. They created an account at Borders that allowed Borders to track them. (I have never bought from Border online, but I assume that they could have purchased without one, like you can at B&N.)
Now Barnes and Noble, for all intents and purposes, is Borders. They are now doing that. They appear to be doing exactly what Borders did with that data.
I am baffled as to what the problem is even supposed to be.
An
Re: (Score:3)
Those of us concerned with privacy are worried by the likes of a company continually selling their lists off to any business that wants it.
That is in fact precisely the issue here.
Its not that B&N another book store acquired the lists from Borders through the bankruptcy.
Its specifically that B&N asserted that they shouldn't be bound by Borders privacy policy.
ie. B&N essentially started out by specifically asserting that it is in fact free to continually sell of the lists to any business that wan
So... a bookstore will get my bookstore history... (Score:3)
I got to say, I dont care in this case, unless B&N has a history of selling their customer data I don't know about, that is.
But this is just a company that (from my understanding) has exactly the same line of business than a company I entrusted my purchase data to. Not only that, now, if I want to buy books, the only big chain option is Barns & Nobles so I would likely restart my history there anyways.
So, why so many are making a buzz over this?
If this was Google or Facebook buying the data to "better target ads", I'd be hunting my junkmail to dig out that email and make sure I opt out.
The advantages of having one's own domain (Score:1)
I have my own domain and email server. Every company gets it's own email address. I don't want to get from a company anymore, or I start getting spam to a specific address, I simply delete that address. You know, like I did to Border's email address when they went out of business.
Tempest in a teapot (Score:2)
The Toysmart precedent, which was used by the FTC here, is that selling the information is allowed only if the purchaser is in the same business and agrees to obey the same privacy policy. While it does violate any pledge not to sell your data at all, selling data under these circumstances can't cause most of the harm that selling your data normally causes. It's not as if they would be allowed to sell it to Facebook or Publisher's Clearing House.
About the only realistic situation I can think of where some
It's not the bankruptcy (Score:2)
It's the previous and ongoing sharing.
This is my idea for a novel. In a future world, not too distant, everything you buy is known by multiple corporations, immediately. If you buy a new shirt and slacks, well, you get an offer on your deck for a deal on a new belt and shoes. If you buy cereal, you get a prompt directing you to where the new fortified milk is.
As they fully develop your profile, they start sending you specific advertisments, everywhere, so that inevitably you only see stuff that you *shou
Re: (Score:2)
Yet so many companies still bother to write flowery privacy policies that boldly claim that your personal info is yours and will NEVER be sold or shared.
Borders didn't even do that. Their policy explicitly stated that they _could_ give your data to companies they merge with, aquire, or are bought out by.