Bose Headphones Secretly Collected User Data, Lawsuit Reveals (fortune.com) 231
The audio maker Bose, whose wireless headphones sell for up to $350, uses an app to collect the listening habits of its customers and provide that information to third parties -- all without the knowledge and permission of the users, according to a lawsuit filed in Chicago. From a report: The complaint accuses Boston-based Bose of violating the WireTap Act and a variety of state privacy laws, adding that a person's audio history can include a window into a person's life and views. "Indeed, one's personal audio selections -- including music, radio broadcast, Podcast, and lecture choices -- provide an incredible amount of insight into his or her personality, behavior, political views, and personal identity," says the complaint, noting a person's audio history may contain files like LGBT podcasts or Muslim call-to-prayer recordings.
Your headphones are spying on you. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
hootie and the blowfish it's cheaper the blank tape
Re:Your headphones are spying on you. (Score:4, Interesting)
noting a person's audio history may contain files like LGBT podcasts or Muslim call-to-prayer recordings.
Why do people who, if you asked them, would say that things like the above shouldn't be stigmatized, then go out of their way to stigmatize them with an implication that content in those categories should be subject to some sort of special expectation of privacy?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, I don't know, perhaps because dickheads persecute them for it?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I don't know, perhaps because dickheads persecute them for it?
So, do you want it normalised or stigmatised?
Re: (Score:2)
So, do you want it normalised or stigmatised?
These are not mutually exclusive categories.
First of all, people who are LGBT are NOT normal. They're not the average person,
definitely outliers, statistically speaking. This does not imply there is a stigma.
After all, some of the Best people such as Einstein were extremely abnormal.... far from the Norm.
Some of the people in the LGBT category WANT you to know they are in that category, some of them want ONLY themselves
or specific people to know, they are
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Some people's religious beliefs include "I should kill anyone who disagrees with me." Some people act on their beliefs.
So it's the killing you object to then, and not the beliefs. Have I got that right? Good, because I agree with you completely. Religious doctrine, the xtian bible for example, is full of dangerous ideas that no sane person would believe enough to actually act on. That doesn't mean the whole religion is bad or it's followers inherently evil. Right?
Re: (Score:2)
Some people's religious beliefs include "I should kill anyone who disagrees with me." Some people act on their beliefs.
So it's the killing you object to then, and not the beliefs. Have I got that right? Good, because I agree with you completely. Religious doctrine, the xtian bible for example, is full of dangerous ideas that no sane person would believe enough to actually act on. That doesn't mean the whole religion is bad or it's followers inherently evil. Right?
Heading into Godwin territory, It's he moral equivalent of being a nice Nazi. You appreciate a strong leader and he makes the trains run on time. These things are true, but you are promoting an organization that does great evil by being part of it. Exactly the same thing with most religions.
Re: (Score:3)
Can you show me _anywhere_ that Jesus said any of those things?
Because you're talking about the corrupted versions of men, specifically by Moses and Paul -- both, who ironically, who started their spiritual "careers" by murdering people.
Even in Jeremiah 8:8 it admits that scripture is corrupted:
"'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus supported Mosaic law. He believed it should be followed. Therefore he advocated all of those things and the murderers in your bible are just that. Your god is pretty much a dick as well:
Turns a woman to salt for caring about her neighbors.
Kills everyone on the planet because they made choices he didn't like.
Destroys two cities because they wanted to freely express their sexuality.
Thinks he has a great servant who offers up his daughters to a bunch of men so they won't bother some "angels".
And those
Re: (Score:3)
You mis-attributing to the pagan Egyptian God Yahweh what man corrupted.
Go read Matthew 22:37-40 again:
Because ANYTHING that contradicts this is a perversion and corruption written by MEN of some nameless God which inclu
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that is the Dual (or Inverse) of Godwin's Law:
--
You can take the people out of Politics,
But you can't take the Politics out of people.
Re: (Score:2)
Who says that....?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Your headphones are spying on you. (Score:4, Insightful)
There's nothing special about the right to privacy, and stigmatization doesn't have to have anything to do with it. Anything you don't want to reveal, you ought to be able to keep to yourself. Religion and sexuality get cited a lot, because they're commonly things people might not want to reveal to strangers, corporations, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Because even though they shouldn't be stigmatized, they are by some people in some places.
Re: (Score:3)
--
JimFive
Re: (Score:2)
noting a person's audio history may contain files like LGBT podcasts or Muslim call-to-prayer recordings.
Why do people who, if you asked them, would say that things like the above shouldn't be stigmatized, then go out of their way to stigmatize them with an implication that content in those categories should be subject to some sort of special expectation of privacy?
Because they aren't.
Its servicing more as a warning, as we continue a slide towards fascism, these will be the first on the "first they came for" lists.
Its not that Muslims or LGBTI need special rights for privacy, its that we all need the right to privacy regardless of if you're listening to mass produced pop or prayer recordings. Muslims, etc... are used as examples because they'll be the first to suffer when rights are revoked.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people who are curious about LGBT podcasts are secretive, and that's about what THEY are comfortable with, AND their choices; they may have people in their life who wouldn't understand. So it is a good example of a sensitive subject.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a special expectation of privacy; these are just examples of why the blanket expectations of privacy. The same applies to alt-right podcasts, or Christian Identity music.
You might not like these people, but they've got just as much right to privacy as you do, and possibly a lot more at stake.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, shit. (Score:3, Insightful)
I've bought Bose headphones (no, not the wireless: it's pretty improbable they spy on me, for a lack of channel for that).
Remember to add Bose to no-buy list.
HELLO, BOSE: You just went from "I'm a happy customer" to "You're on my no-buy list". Are you glad now?
(Captcha: "decibel". Perhaps my earphones are listening on me, after all?)
Re: (Score:3)
Companies are, in fact, not (usually) stupid. Someone calculated the revenue from selling the information against the loss in sales X the chance it will be discovered. The profit said "do it!" I've worked for companies where it cost more to keep existing customers happy than to advertise for new ones. Guess what we did?
Re:Oh, shit. (Score:5, Insightful)
This was for the longest time the approach to security. How high is the damage if our customer data gets lost? How much would it cost to secure it? It costs HOW MUCH? Screw security!
Only when laws were passed that made CEOs personally (!) liable (yes, with their private money) if they can't show that they've taken reasonable steps to secure it, suddenly security became an issue.
And we won't see anything being done in favor of privacy unless corporations feel the govenments' boots on their necks.
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad that in this case, the government has just as much interest in privacy invasion as the corporations do. In fact, the government tends to just get the corps to do their dirty work for them, so I'm not sure where you think this magical governmental salvation is going to come from.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Companies are, in fact, not (usually) stupid.
I'd disagree - companies are, in fact, very stupid in very many ways. Just remember that the "brains" of a company for all intents and purposes are usually the CEO/COO and related C level folks. Now realize that most of those folks don't know the first thing about data security (for purposes of this particular topic) and only see the marketer numbers about how collecting x will generate y revenue for a minimal cost of 0.01% of generating y, as they determined with a single question during a program meeting.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the ONLY reason for apps (Score:2, Informative)
I don't understand why The Kids (TM) are obsessed with apps. Any time someone tries to get you to use an app where you don't have to, you can be pretty sure it's in order to harvest more data about you.
Captcha: everyday
I am so sick of this shit (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't buy expensive headphones and generally have avoided some things that are privacy invading. But even surfing the web I get some well-timed mailings that make me fucking paranoid as shit. So to that end I have a request of corporate America: My life is not a resource to be commoditized. Stop fucking spying on me you slimy pieces of shit. I will share information with you IF I WANT TO.
Re: (Score:3)
Not to worry. I still get American Girl adverts after buying one for my niece. Who just graduated college.
I still get Hello Kitty adverts after buying some USB drives as a joke.
Whatever the hell info they have on me, well, good luck with that.
Re:I am so sick of this shit (Score:4, Funny)
Not to worry. I still get American Girl adverts after buying one for my niece. Who just graduated college.
I still get Hello Kitty adverts after buying some USB drives as a joke.
Your "nice" and "joke" aside, just a reminder that /. is a safe space and you're free to be yourself w/o any judgment. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
We're not targeting you.
Rgds, The Dragnet
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What's needed is a shim for Android and iPhone. To lie to all apps about basically...everything. When an app asks for permissions, this shim should look the app up and give it 'appropriate' access.
Tell all the apps you are constantly on the shopping streets of Beverly Hills, Venice, Manhattan and Monaco. Watch the 'free shit for rich fuckers that don't need it' roll in. Have it fake up obvious charter flights on gulfstreams...flights between 'executive airports' that don't match any scheduled ones, but t
Re: (Score:3)
My solution for Android requires root, but it is effective: I run a firewall that automatically blocks all traffic to and from all apps. Then I make exceptions for specific apps that both actually require internet access to do the tasks I want and that I am comfortable with. There are very, very few of those.
Re: (Score:2)
Feeding them garbage is better than just cutting them off. It has to be turnkey.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The cost of all of those free sites you visit.
if you had to pay $1 a month to every website you want to visit, would you do it?
Yes.
sigh (Score:5, Insightful)
Sigh. I know this is Slashdot, but come on!
No.
The lawsuit alleges (innocent until proven guilty) that the Bose completely optional app - not the headphones - collects too much data and shares it with 3rd parties without the user's consent.
Which is bad if true, but it is a far cry from the "your headphones are spying on you" that the headline claims.
Unsurprisingly, Slashdot probably picked this up to take yet another a jab at Apple.
Now, queue ignorant comments about how bluetooth headphones are tools of the devil, Apple is evil, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
My reading of those who actually own these headphones says the app is not optional. There are settings, for instance, that can only be changed via the app. At best one could say the app is optional if you don't mind hobbling your expensive headphones.
Re: (Score:2)
Bose is only a tiny increment past what Google and Apple also do.
Granting they, at least, have the excuse of serving up the content. All can make somewhat plausible claims of 'enhanced user experience', e.g. pandora like 'suggestions'.
Re: (Score:3)
iTunes.
Re: (Score:2)
The app might be used with the headphones, but the headphones don't need the app to operate. You can use the headphones perfectly fine without it, which would mean no data collection.
Ka-CHING! (Score:3)
Sure, this is not a good thing. But also remember, lawsuits like these are not filed by users who feel they were wronged, they are filed by lawyers looking for a good payout, it's a business plan. You, the user, will get a $25 coupon on an additional Bose purchase.
Re: (Score:2)
You're a cheap bastard that never would have bought Bose anyway.
This should be interesting... (Score:2)
However, one can be hopeful that a hard nosed judge is selected that truly sees this growing trend as the problem it has become and gives Bose the ban hammer. Such a rulin
You get what you pay for... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Why would anyone spend $10 to $20 on a pair of headphones? I typically spend $1 to $2 for headphones.
Re:You get what you pay for... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Hah. I'd give you mod points if I had 'em.
Re: (Score:3)
Why would anyone pay $1 or $2 for headphones? I typically rip them off.
Re: (Score:3)
I typically spend $1 to $2 for headphones.
Those usually fall apart pretty quickly. The $10 to $20 headphones give me the durability I need for the year or two that they are usable.
My Sennheisers are over 15 years old now. Paid $150 and they still sound great.
Replacing cheaper hardware every year or two tends to add up, which confirms your initial statement; you get what you pay for.
Re: (Score:2)
Replacing cheaper hardware every year or two tends to add up, which confirms your initial statement; you get what you pay for.
I'm not going to cry over a pair of $10 to $20 headphones when they self-destruct from day-to-day use. I'll toss them out, pull another one out from the storage closet, and order some more if I need to. Why spend more money on something you're going have to replace anyway?
Re: (Score:2)
Replacing cheaper hardware every year or two tends to add up, which confirms your initial statement; you get what you pay for.
I'm not going to cry over a pair of $10 to $20 headphones when they self-destruct from day-to-day use. I'll toss them out, pull another one out from the storage closet, and order some more if I need to. Why spend more money on something you're going have to replace anyway?
My point was more centered around the fact that headphones are not a product you have to replace often if you get a quality pair, unless you tend to beat the shit out of them during day-to-day usage. Mine sit on my desk and I use them quite often, which is why sound quality and comfort are key factors for me. To each their own. Cheers.
Re: (Score:2)
[...] unless you tend to beat the shit out of them during day-to-day usage.
My headphone sit on my desktop. If they end up on the floor, I'm more likely to step on them or roll over them with the chair. One time I found the cable sliced into two. Not sure how that happened. Self-destruct items — keyboards, mice and headphones — are disposable and cheap to replace.
Re: (Score:2)
Why ARE you spending more money than you need to when you could have just bought a decent pair the first time?
Because headphones, keyboards and mice are items that self-destruct after a year or two of daily use. It's easier to keep spares in the closet and replace as needed.
Re: (Score:3)
I think they were about $499 when I got mine, so, prices are fairly consistent.
They give about as good a sound as you can get from a mp3 player while riding a bike or in the gym.
I really like them, but won't be as easy to use on next phone unless Apple stops being "brave" and reconsiders the jack removal from new products.
I think in some areas, you *do* get what you pay for...and I like to get as good a sound rep
Re: (Score:2)
Jeez. I felt bad enough when my dog chewed my "expensive" headphones that cost me maybe $40. I would be ticked beyond any puppy cuteness level at replacing a $500 pair, or even $100.
Re: (Score:2)
I would be ticked beyond any puppy cuteness level at replacing a $500 pair, or even $100.
Or be the unfortunate father at the Apple Genius Bar after your toddler dumps juice into your high-end MacBook Pro, find out that Apple Care doesn't cover that kind of damage, and a replacement logic board costs almost as much as a brand new laptop. I overheard that sob tale while getting my vintage 2006 Black MacBook repaired in 2012.
Re: (Score:2)
My dog chewed up a pair I first had, and I found that the company was great and for $100 would replace them with a new pair which worked out great for me.
Sometimes good warranty service can offset a higher price. I buy computer parts from Other World Computing [macsales.com]. A bit more expensive than what I can get from Hong Kong but OWC-branded parts have a three-year warranty. I recently sent back a 2.5"-to-3.5" bracket because the SATA cable snapped off the connector. I got a brand new part and the broken connector removed from the SATA cable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Have you even HEARD a $350 pair of headphones?
A $350 pair of headphones, no. A $1,100 pair of headphones (Beyerdynamic T1 [amzn.to]), yes. Sounds nice but overpriced for my modest lifestyle. I have a friend who makes less money than me who is saving up for a pair.
You own a phone without an audio port don't you? Admit it.
I have a iPhone 6S with audio jack. But I only use headphones with my PC.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's interesting that you bring up modest lifestyle.
I have a high-frequency hearing loss in one ear. The difference between a $20 headphones and $1100 headphones is $1080.
Re: (Score:3)
I have a call every morning with my team in India. Because of time zones, that call is every morning while I'm on the train. I can't hear anything with regular headphones, and you wind up having the volume turned all the way up trying to drown out the ambient noise. With my Bose ones, I can keep the volume relatively low, and hear th
Bad, but not as horrible as one would think. (Score:5, Interesting)
In the article it says you can use the headphones without the app. Bose "encourages" customers to download and use the app with the headphones. That should give it away. Why do you think they want you to use their app? You can adjust the app settings - presumably what it can and cannot do. It seems what Bose did wrong was not be clear up front as to what the default result of using the app would be. That's not quite as bad as your smart TV spying on you if you connect it to your internet connected LAN.
I'm going to recheck my microwave now. I wonder if I should down this GE microwave app.
Re:Bad, but not as horrible as one would think. (Score:4, Insightful)
How fucked-up is this world, where you can't even get wireless headphones without the gods-be-damned manufacturer invading your privacy and selling your personally-identifiable information for profit?
Re: (Score:3)
TIL Bose has an app to go with headphones. Why is anyone's guess.
Privacy Legislation (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm more concerned that at some point, the defense will be "after all of the identity theft, news about hacking, and stories like this one, you just should have expected this". And that defense might just win, without a specific law. A clear, well written one. Which seems unlikely under Profit First TrumpTato.
Bose got caught (Score:2)
Why wouldn't cable set top boxes and roku like media players not collect such data? The incentives are enormous. All they need some legal fig leaf. Credit card companies have been consolidating spending habits. Target famously detected the pregnancy of a girl unbeknownst to her parents.
Stsarting to agree with those... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This movie [wikipedia.org] seemed far-fetched when it came out in 1998. We're not even two decades later and it's now the accepted norm.
I'm afraid to think about how things will be in 2037.
Bad Headline (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
In before Apps!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The headphones aren't collecting any data. The App is, it's just another app selling your information. That's what apps are for!
Is the app collecting and selling your information without the headphones?
If not, then you're splitting cunt hairs over this, and the headline is more accurate than you assume.
In Soviet Russia... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually my headphones are Bose QC25, so...
In Soviet Russia, my headphones listen to YOU! (as in, not me but everyone around me).
Poison the data well (Score:2)
You want data? You shall receive! It's about time we start writing apps that supply data to those data hungry collectors. All kinds of data. You want to know what web pages I visit? Fire up a script that visits all of them. You want to know what YouTube videos I watch? Fire up a script that opens a load of them in the background while I watch the one I actually want to watch. You want to know what ... you get the idea.
There is one thing that's worse for someone trying to sell data than having no data: Havin
Re: (Score:3)
Name: Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya.
Mother: unknown
Father: You killed my father. Prepare to die. Montoya
Date of birth: around the 14th–17th century
Age: 493
Location: Five dollars per week, late fees of ten dollars per day.
Occupation: Finding the six-fingered man who killed his father.
Email: hellomynameisinigomontoyayoukilledmyfatherpreparetodie@gmail.com
Re: (Score:2)
You want to know what web pages I visit? Fire up a script that visits all of them.
You're only a couple of steps away from inventing tor.
No "Terms of Use" or "User Agreement"? (Score:2)
Was the company really so naive as to not include verbiage granting them permission to do this in the "User Agreement" or "Terms of Use" that users are required to accept prior to installing the app?
Most cell phone apps require you to agree to forfeit your privacy for the privilege of using the app? Many of the agreements I've seen clearly specify that they will access just about everything on your phone, including the camera and microphone, to gather data about you.
BOSE = terribly privacy policy (Score:5, Interesting)
My wife bought a Wave IV Soundtouch with a 30-day return policy - the only good policy they have and the one we exercised.
Want to set the thing up and use the features you paid for like Internet radio? You have to use the app. The first thing the app requires to even start setup is access to your location. WTF? Then there is their so-called "privacy" policy (which is currently so private that they have broken links on their site so you can't even find it now) that allows them to track your listening (which could even include AM, FM, CD, etc), combine it with other info and sell or use it for marketing purposes.
In the words of my sound engineer friend: BOSE stands for Bring Other Sound Equipment.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you BOSE fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig with my QuietComfort 35 wireless loaded with Megadeth for about 20 minutes now while I attempt to listen to a 17 Meg mp3 from one directory on the ipod. 20 minutes. At home, with my Pioneer HDJ2000 listening to Radiohead, which by all standards should be a lot slower than Megadeth, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
In addition, during this jam session, Soundclou
What evidence? (Score:3)
Headphone Jack (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I always thought those Bose NC cans cost too much (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have no doubt the Bose are better (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I mean, ISPs can do it, so why can't they?
Users of ISPs likely agreed to their monitoring via a EULA they didn't read.
IANAL, but on the surface it appears that Bose fucked up by not even offering up a EULA for no one to read.
Re: (Score:2)
But still kings of active noise-cancelling headphones.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
How can a pair of headphones prevent me from using my audio player to adjust the balance?