Ford Exec: 'We Know Everyone Who Breaks the Law' Thanks To Our GPS In Your Car

An anonymous reader sends this report from Business Insider: "[Ford VP Jim Farley] was trying to describe how much data Ford has on its customers, and illustrate the fact that the company uses very little of it in order to avoid raising privacy concerns: 'We know everyone who breaks the law, we know when you're doing it. We have GPS in your car, so we know what you're doing. By the way, we don't supply that data to anyone,' he told attendees. Rather, he said, he imagined a day when the data might be used anonymously and in aggregate to help other marketers with traffic related problems. Suppose a stadium is holding an event; knowing how much traffic is making its way toward the arena might help the venue change its parking lot resources accordingly, he said." Farley later realized how his statement sounded, and added, "We do not track our customers in their cars without their approval or consent."

Re:Why does Ford need this data?

[WormholeFiend]

"What I want to know is, Why does Ford need this data?"

Their robot car department probably needs it, at the very least.

These are fighting words

[sinij]

As a consumer, why would this entice me to purchase a car from Ford?

Crime

[neoform]

If Ford knows people are committing crimes, aren't they legally required to report it, otherwise they become an accessory..?

Does Ford obey court orders?

[mbone]

Farley later realized how his statement sounded, and added, "We do not track our customers in their cars without their approval or consent."

So, if Ford gets a court order requiring the tracking of someone, or some class of someones, they will disobey it?

Sure. And all Fords get 1000 miles per gallon, too.

Look for the scenes in new mob movies where part of the initiation into the mafia is taking the GPS out of your car.

Re:And that is why....

[StripedCow]

I will keep this baby going for the rest of my life, and no company will be tracking my whereabouts.

Until your car doesn't pass the upcoming environmental (read: tracking) regulations.

Re:Herpin' the Derp

[erikkemperman]

Um, I never said you were incorrect about that EULA. I just wanted to point out that even when they would prefer not to hand over the data -- which is what this exec is saying, whether or not their license would formally allow them to -- there are cases in which 1) they don't have a choice in the matter and 2) the rest of us can't expect to find out about it.

Where have we seen this before?

[rmdingler]

OnStar has used Madison Avenue to convince auto purchasers of the safety and security advantages of always being monitored,

completely failing to mention the compromise in freedom.

Re:Remove it

[Anonymous Coward]

GPS is not 2 way communication. How exactly are they retrieving the information from a car? Do they have a secret cellular connection?

Re:Herpin' the Derp

[locrien]

Let me get this straight.

You think in order to have private property we need to make sure it isn't private property but state or fed owned?

We need a new government. Lets get some new citizens with some balls while were at it.

Re:SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT!

[Ichijo]

Instead of building additional lanes, it may make sense to start charging truckers their fair share for the damage trucks do to our roads [jsonline.com]. This would move more freight to rail where it does less damage and creates less traffic congestion, while generating more revenue to pay for the roads and allow gas taxes to be lowered.