Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Google Apple

Virtual Assistants Such As Amazon's Echo Break US Child Privacy Law, Experts Say (theguardian.com) 67

Mark Harris, reporting for The Guardian: An investigation by the Guardian has found that despite Amazon marketing the Echo to families with young children, the device is likely to contravene the US Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), set up to regulate the collection and use of personal information from anyone younger than 13. Along with Google, Apple and others promoting voice-activated artificial intelligence systems to young children, the company could now face multimillion-dollar fines. "This is part of the initial wave of marketing to children using the internet of things," says Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, a privacy advocacy group that helped write the law. "It is exactly why the law was enacted in the first place, to protect young people from pervasive data collection."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Virtual Assistants Such As Amazon's Echo Break US Child Privacy Law, Experts Say

Comments Filter:
  • All data is valuable to these companies.
    • by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Thursday May 26, 2016 @01:21PM (#52188499) Homepage Journal
      Hey....

      The kids gotta learn to start ignoring ads at some point in their life.

      Maybe we're looking at this wrong. Educate them early on what worthless advertising is...and train them to ignore it.

      This will greatly benefit them as young and older adults.

      • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Thursday May 26, 2016 @01:44PM (#52188781)

        The kids gotta learn to start ignoring ads at some point in their life.

        I have an Amazon Echo, use it everyday, and have never once heard an ad for anything. This is not about ads. It is about recording voices, and storing the data. They store the data so they can improve their algorithms, and users can provide feedback if the Echo misunderstands a request. They may use the data for other things as well.

      • This is great advice, and in no way related to GP's point nor to the point of the story.

        By the way, what happens if cell phone apps are monitoring children's voices (as I'm sure countless apps are)? Do Siri and Cortana escape the child's right to privacy?

        • Do Siri and Cortana escape the child's right to privacy?

          Microsoft will not allow a person under 13 years old to use Cortana.

        • By the way, what happens if cell phone apps are monitoring children's voices?

          That is okay as long as the apps are not marketed to children.

          Do Siri and Cortana escape the child's right to privacy?

          As mentioned in TFA, some ads for Siri specifically show kids using the service, so they may be in violation of COPPA.

  • Combine one of these devices with Microsoft's pervy chat bot!

  • ...and the rest of us aren't?

    • Because you're old enough to decide for yourself to buy and use the device?

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        That's only a valid answer if there is an alternative comparable device to use. Many many people no longer have a choice to avoid these devices altogether, whether it be for a work requirement, etc.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by DogDude ( 805747 )
          That's only a valid answer if there is an alternative comparable device to use. Many many people no longer have a choice to avoid these devices altogether, whether it be for a work requirement, etc.

          Huh? In what way is this device necessary for ANY function, whatsoever?
          • Huh? In what way is this device necessary for ANY function, whatsoever?

            I have an Amazon Echo, and it would not be useful for work. But a somewhat improved version would be. If it could understand a broader range of questions, then it would be great for someone that has to work with their hands, while needing to request information to do their job. New features are being added, and since most of that functionality is on the server, everybody has immediate access. Within a few years, these devices will become much more capable.

      • by fyngyrz ( 762201 ) on Thursday May 26, 2016 @01:13PM (#52188433) Homepage Journal

        As a parent, are you not old enough (informed enough should be the metric, but our society is bewildered about age) to decide if your kids can use the device?

        Oh, right, parenting. Not allowed to do that any longer, my bad. "It takes a village" (to pillage your informed personal and consensual choices, not to mention parenting.) Of course you're not old enough. We'll decide that for you. Move along. Move along.

        • I actually agree with you - I was just replying to why we don't have similar laws for Adults.

          I actually think parents can make a responsible decision for their children in this case.

          In fact... this whole story is dubious because I thought children could use online services as long as their parents consented to it...

  • by ScentCone ( 795499 ) on Thursday May 26, 2016 @01:04PM (#52188347)
    How is this not simply the parents' choice? Kids aren't buying Echo units and installing/using them. It's parents. If they make the conscious decision to introduce such a device into their homes, and decide to use them, that's all there is to it. They have chosen to be a household that uses this device and its associated services. If they don't like the implications of that, they can simply choose not to put the device in a space where kids will interact with it, or choose not to use it at all.

    People who are trying to make it more complicated than that are just looking for ways to get government more involved in what goes on inside the home.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by ninthbit ( 623926 )
      It's not just Echos. We've cut the cord and my kids use Roku's to watch most of their TV. Services like Hulu track all that garbage, but are making absolutely no effort to determine the viewers age. Netflix at least has age categories you can assign to profiles, but I don't see any COPPA parental control panel for the young kids. Its only to limit the catalog to the less sexual/violent media. I'm sure their lawyers give them the "It's technically legal because it's just one account" thumbs up. But if
      • by DRJlaw ( 946416 )

        But if Hulu is recommending to me to watch Daniel Tiger, then clearly my kids viewing data is being saved.

        Actually, if you don't tell Hulu that a viewer is under 13 (e.g., Netflix allows separate viewer profiles, and I think allows you to specify profiles specifically for children, but does not ask for age), then your viewing data is being saved, or potentially that of a 13-17 year old kid. Neither are covered by COPPA.

        Hulu has no idea whether you're a child or a furry fetishist, and there is no legal requ

    • Because in Soviet America, the government is really the parent.

      Think about it.

    • by geek ( 5680 )

      In the US you are correct. In the EU this gets a little stickier, for example:
      http://www.opposingviews.com/i... [opposingviews.com]

      Parents in France can be sued for posting pics of their children without permission.

    • by Dutch Gun ( 899105 ) on Thursday May 26, 2016 @01:38PM (#52188707)

      I think the article answers this reasonably well:

      COPPA applies to online services that are either designed for children younger than 13 or that know those children are using them. Khaliah Barnes, associate director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), believes that by showing pre-teenage children using voice-activated AI devices, Amazon, Google and Apple are admitting their services are aimed at youngsters.

      “When your advertising markets this product to children, and parents with children, that would absolutely trigger COPPA,” she says. “Recording children in the privacy of the home is genuinely creepy, and this warrants additional investigation by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and [US] states.”

      Siri is being advertised using Sesame Street's cookie monster (check out TFA). That's absolutely targeted at children. And of course, we've heard about the toy products like Barbie that sends recorded data out across the net to a server where it's processed and responded to. I think the big problem is that the parents aren't necessarily aware of the implications of these devices. No one is explicitly told that everything they say is recorded and transmitted to corporate headquarters. Would people be slightly more averse to putting these devices in the home if they knew they were essentially constantly-on, remotely controlled microphones? Maybe... maybe not.

      I'm definitely not a "regulate first and ask questions later" sort of guy, so I'd say it's probably best to simply watch this space really carefully. We can always introduce new, specific legislation as the need arises to deal with potential threats. I think it's generally a bad idea for legislation to try to preempt problems that don't actually exist yet - you know... "for the children", etc. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep a close eye on what's happening here.

      • Siri is being advertised using Sesame Street's cookie monster (check out TFA). That's absolutely targeted at children.

        Nah. The ad (which is aired during adult-oriented, disposable-income prime time) is aimed at busy parents, and is intentionally ironic, playing off of that familiar character's notable impatience.

    • by Rhaize ( 626145 )

      People who are trying to make it more complicated than that are just looking for ways to get government more involved in what goes on inside the home.

      The problem is that by letting the phones, tv's and all of this data collection is just a step or 2 away from the government more involved in what goes on inside of the home. Do you think for a second that these devices won't be compromised once the government sees the need? And while we are at it, is the government really that much worse than google, microsoft, apple or now amazon? the FBI compiles a dossier on their citizens, and conspiracy theorist (/.ers) go crazy with indignation. The private data coll

  • No, they do not (Score:5, Informative)

    by DRJlaw ( 946416 ) on Thursday May 26, 2016 @01:35PM (#52188657)

    Do not take the Guardian and the Center for Digital Democracy at their word.

    Read the guidance contained in the second link of the summary. Specifically, read: "Who is covered by COPPA" here [ftc.gov].

    The Rule applies to operators of commercial websites and online services directed to children under the age of 13 that collect personal information. In addition, it applies to operators of sites and online services geared toward general audiences when they have "actual knowledge" they are collecting information from children under 13.
    * * *
    The Rule doesn't require operators of sites or services directed to general audiences to investigate the ages of its users. However, asking for or otherwise collecting information that establishes that a visitor is under 13 triggers COPPA compliance.

    This is a general audience device and service, full stop. I don't have one, so I cannot say whether they even permit the associated account to be set up by a child 13 or under, or allow multiple user accounts with accounts for children 13 or under, but if I were to purchase one, set it up with my Amazon (or Google, for their device) account, and allow everyone in the house to use the device under that account, there would be no violation of COPPA.

    The targeting and "actual knowledge" requirements cannot be deemed fulfilled simply because an advertisement shows a child and the service knows that children might be using the service.

    FTA:

    "Khaliah Barnes, associate director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), believes that by showing pre-teenage children using voice-activated AI devices, Amazon, Google and Apple are admitting their services are aimed at youngsters."

    No, that is a general audience that happens to include children. Targeting children requires a service aspect specifically directed to children.

    Notice that the one thing the article does not say is that the FTC has opened an investigation. Merely that the CDD "[is] going to recommend to the FTC that they give industry guidance of how the internet of things and COPPA should work together."

    Very little to see here, then...

    • There's also the dufus claiming this is exactly why COPPA was enacted in the first place. COPPA was enacted to prevent web site operators from gathering tracking and identifying data about children; it wasn't enacted to prevent modern AI systems from collecting behavioral data to adjust themselves to the user's needs and preferences, which is exactly what these devices do. Their core functionality is "Oh, you're asking me for something specific that fits a sea of general things, but I know what you mean

  • You mean to tell me just adding boilerplate text asserting you don't "knowingly" collect data from children does not provide immunity?

  • by Macdude ( 23507 ) on Thursday May 26, 2016 @03:20PM (#52189761)

    "It is exactly why the law was enacted in the first place, to protect young people from pervasive data collection."
    Why just kids? Why not just make a law that protects everyone from pervasive data collection?

  • Why aren't we up in arms about all the data collection happening to any kid using a computer in the last 16 years? I don't think a cookie warning is an effective measure against that, either, but the warning means it's obvious the tracking does happen. If we can tell so much about an "anonymous" user from their google searches, can't we gather an awful lot of knowledge about a child without even knowing it's a child in the first place?

    Maybe put the onus on advertisers and such to make sure it's not a chil

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Working...