Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
AI Businesses The Courts

McDonalds Faces Potential Class Action Lawsuit Over Automated Drive-Thru (theregister.com) 115

McDonald's equiped 10 of its restaurants in Chicago with automated speech-recognition for their drive-through windows. Now they're facing a potential class-action lawsuit. Long-time Slashdot reader KindMind shares this report from the Register: McDonald's has been accused of illegally collecting and processing customers' voice recordings without their consent in the U.S. state of Illinois... The state has some of the strictest data privacy laws; its Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) states: "No private entity may collect, capture, purchase, receive through trade, or otherwise obtain a person's or a customer's biometric identifier or biometric information." unless it receives written consent.

Shannon Carpenter, a resident of Illinois, sued [PDF] McDonald's in April on behalf of himself and all other affected state residents. He claimed the fast-chow biz has broken BIPA by not obtaining written consent from its customers to collect and process their voice data, nor has it explained in its privacy policy how or if the data is stored or deleted. His lawsuit also stated that McDonald's has been experimenting with AI software taking orders at its drive thrus since last year.

"Plaintiff, like the other class members, to this day does not know the whereabouts of his voiceprint biometrics which defendant obtained," Carpenter's lawsuit stated. Under the BIPA, people can receive up to $5,000 in damages from private entities for each violation committed "intentionally or recklessly," or $1,000 if each violation was from negligence instead.

The suit also claimed the machine-learning software built by McD Tech Labs doesn't just transcribe speech into text, it processes audio samples to glean all sorts of personal information to predict a customer's "age, gender, accent, nationality, and national origin."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

McDonalds Faces Potential Class Action Lawsuit Over Automated Drive-Thru

Comments Filter:
  • order an broken ice cream machine at one!

    • Order an oaken ice cream machine? You can probably buy one of those at a high end second-hand store.

  • by Alain Williams ( 2972 ) <addw@phcomp.co.uk> on Saturday June 12, 2021 @11:45AM (#61480152) Homepage

    that what they said into the microphone was processed by a machine ? If the voice recording was deleted within a few minutes of the customer driving away (satisfied) then what is the problem ?

    If they do to a 'normal' restaurant then no one will complain that what they said was processed by the person/employee who took the order ** and that that employee will remember the conversation for some indeterminate time .... so what is the difference ? I think that this will be an important test case as this sort of scenario will become more & more common.

    ** I do realize that at 'normal' restaurants the customer orders at a screen in-store.

    • I think this is a lawyer who 8a testing out the law for their own enrichment. If it works, any business who uses âoevoice processingâ as in every single call center, will have to have written permission (before a phone call?) or face potential lawsuit.

    • If the voice recording was deleted within a few minutes ...

      Was it? McDonalds may be storing the records to use as training data to improve the voice-rec.

      I'm not sure why anybody would care, but nonetheless, that would be a violation of Illinois law.

      But if there is no storage, then it is silly for the plaintiff to complain they didn't give consent for "processing" when they choose to speak into the microphone.

    • by sound+vision ( 884283 ) on Saturday June 12, 2021 @12:37PM (#61480274) Journal

      Considering the drive-thru intercom has always been a walkie-talkie connecting directly to a cashier's headset, yes they will be surprised.

      The problem, legally, comes if they are storing the voice data to be analyzed (and probably sold) in ways that weren't disclosed to customer, and constitute a biometric ID. So far, McDonald's has declined to say what they do with it. That's why they are in court.

      These type of laws aim to ensure, among other things, that we don't end up with a surveillance-based social credit system along the lines of China. (The only difference in the US is it would be administered by LexisNexis and the credit bureaus instead of the Party.) The patchwork of state laws against these practices is generally not adequate, and many organizations choose to ignore them anyway. I'm glad at least one of them is being forced to account for what their practices really are.

      The funny part is, McD's could have probably just written a public statement about "We will never sell or voiceprint your data, we take your privacy very seriously..." to calm this guy down. Or, gotten legal consent for the data by adding some fine print to a rewards program agreement. They made a play, instead, to keep quiet about it and hope nobody will notice. They understand this tactic has worked for many other companies, and let them hoard mountains of data to sell later.

    • Sorry at a restaurant there is a server taking your order at the table ;)
    • by GrahamJ ( 241784 )

      Come on, you can’t say there’s no difference in customer expectations between talking to a person vs. talking to a machine. People expect a closed loop with a human to be ephemeral whereas talking to a machine necessarily implies analysis and possibly recording. People are going to have different comfort levels for those.

  • That's one strike against the evil empire of ... what is that stuff they sell? Coffee? Some other nutrition-free sludge, doused in repellent advertising? Some sort of shit like that.

    Anyway, whatever they sell in MacDonalds - a place I haven't visited since desperately hungry and facing an 8 hour train journey across Korea - this is a strike against it, and that can't be a bad thing.

  • by Nicholas Schumacher ( 21495 ) on Saturday June 12, 2021 @11:54AM (#61480174) Homepage

    If the courts decide that is a valid application of the law, then technically every cell phone company, every customer service line that has voice automation, and pretty much anything that either has voice recognition or recording that is not personally owned by the person using it is likely in violation.

    • I would welcome a way to disable all that

    • Good. They should be banned from routinely recording calls, analyzing the data, then not saying what they do with it since they're probably selling it. McD's isn't getting sued for ephemeral data held just long enough to process the request, they're getting sued for keeping it and not saying what they're doing with it; at a minimum they're using it to further train their systems. Which should require consent, which they're not getting.
  • Slippery slope... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sarren1901 ( 5415506 ) on Saturday June 12, 2021 @11:59AM (#61480188)

    So I first had to go do a bit of research on what all could be done with a voice signature and just how effective that could be. I don't know how McDs systems work, but I suppose if they were keeping all the voice data and then tying it to the digital transaction you could potentially build a database of people based on their voice signature. If they put up a camera to take a picture of the drive and add that to the database, you got some cool stuff to sell here.

    If they aren't collecting the data, just using it and dumping it, or building a database of customer information, then I don't see the problem. If they are doing that, then yes this should stop.

    They could just be using this as a way to attack McDs for using automation instead of hiring people. This is just the beginning.

    • ahhrrMFBI-AHrummabuse aakaamprofilingarrh

        Ohh, that was a really bad combination cough/sneeze I just had there. Sorry 'bout that,

        So what real harm could come from all of this?

    • Don't even need to do either. Just have a McD's app on one's cellphone. Some other fast food places do that.

    • I would actually be okay with this one. Every single time I order a Diet Coke with no ice, and it's less than 10% of the time that I actually get that.

      Learn my patterns, let the fucking robots fill the orders.

      Keep three humans around - one to maintain the machines, one to handle customer service, and a third for sanitation.

      • Not in Illinois, they want to continuously bombard you with tampon ads because it would be illegal to fingerprint you as a male.

    • Re:Slippery slope... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Saturday June 12, 2021 @12:53PM (#61480296)

      I suppose if they were keeping all the voice data and then tying it to the digital transaction you could potentially build a database of people based on their voice signature. If they put up a camera to take a picture of the drive and add that to the database, you got some cool stuff to sell here.

      It seems like the camera would be far more valuable for that purpose. You could take a pic of the license plate, cross-reference it to get an address and name (though you get that anyway if they pay by credit card). The only added value I can see to getting a voiceprint is to sell to other companies wanting to use voiceprint recognition. That may become something in the future (I hope not, but dystopian views all seem to point that way). But it would seem to have little to no marginal value today.

      They could just be using this as a way to attack McDs for using automation instead of hiring people. This is just the beginning.

      While driving cross-country, I stayed at a motel in a small town in the middle of the desert, New Mexico I think. I went through the drive-thru of a Jack in the Box at midnight to get something to eat. The person who took my order had a southern accent, which I thought was unusual enough that I asked him about it to make some small talk. Turns out he was actually in a call center in Alabama or thereabouts. At night time, each individual Jack in the Box didn't get enough customers to warrant hiring someone to take drive-thru orders. So they'd wired all their drive-thru boxes to connect to a call center in one location. That way one employee could take drive-thru orders from multiple Jack in the Boxes, and punch the order in and transmit it back to that store's computer.

      • Duh, you pay using a credit card with your name on it!

        • Similar to posting... my home automation system is spying on me, a thief could hack into it and tell when I am at home based on my electricity consumption! --- typed into your phone, which has a camera, mic and internet connection, while you were in the bathroom.

    • Here in the Netherlands we're doing literally that. One idea is that elderly people will be easier to recognise and help, so they can access services using just their phone.

      I couldn't find the link to that quickly, but I found this example of a Dutch bank aiming to do the exact same thing: https://tweakers.net/nieuws/18... [tweakers.net] (Dutch language)

    • Aren't their literally camera's is like every store? If these laws and their interpretation are to be believed, every single security camera in Illinois is violating the law at a rate of 30-60 times per second. And if multiple people are in the shot, this includes employees who have not explicitly signed away their rights apparently, potentially many times this number. A single small bank branch is probably obtaining the GDP of the planet in potential fines every month.

    • by Kogun ( 170504 )
      Anything you've installed on your phone or installed in your house is going to have a EULA that includes consent for everything concerned in this lawsuit.

      A simple fix for McD's going forward, is to only use the voice recognition that is triggered at the drive-thru speaker via an audio tone handshake the customer triggers via the McD's app. The consent is in the app EULA. The convenience for the customer is that they can then voice their order immediately upon driving up to the speaker and don't have to w
    • "If they aren't collecting the data, just using it and dumping it" even the GDPR allows the collection of private data as long as it is used only for the purpose of the transaction, and then destroyed afterward. But if McDo did indeed save the data to use as sample to train their AI, they were very very dumb or did not consult a lawyer.
  • of mutes who want to use the drive thru?

    • They'll do that next year.
    • mutes who want to use the drive thru?

      On top of that, their menu doesn't have a Braille version for blind people using the drive-through either.

      • Every American McDonald's has a braille menu for the blind. You have to walk into the store to ask for it though.
    • by lsllll ( 830002 )

      You made me wonder if the word "mute" may be on its way out, getting replaced by something else. So I gave it a cursory look and didn't find anything, but I did run across this [nda.ie] page which has a list of words that are now frowned upon. First reference:

      Term no longer in use: the disabled, Term Now Used: person with a disability or persons with disabilities

      So, I'd guess at some point "mute" will become politically incorrect and get replaced with "person who doesn't talk". Bye bye English!

      • You made me wonder if the word "mute" may be on its way out, getting replaced by something else. So I gave it a cursory look and didn't find anything, but I did run across this [nda.ie] page which has a list of words that are now frowned upon. First reference:

        Term no longer in use: the disabled,
        Term Now Used: person with a disability or persons with disabilities

        So, I'd guess at some point "mute" will become politically incorrect and get replaced with "person who doesn't talk". Bye bye English!

        "Vocally Challenged"?

    • by taustin ( 171655 )

      There was a law firm in Los Angeles who did that for handicapped access in retail stores (mostly wheelchair access in old buildings). In the end, the entire firm was disbarred and declared vexatious litigants. But it took way too long.

  • security cameras can gather a lot of that information more accurately. I don't see a lawsuit over them. Makes me wonder of the true purpose of the lawsuit. Could it be about jobs?

    • Photographs are specifically excluded from "biometric information." The law does't specifically mention video, but, while IANAL, video can be described as "motion pictures" and so is also likely excluded by extension. Video is also not specifically included.
    • Security cameras doing facial recognition are facing similar challenges.

  • MCDs is probably also grabbing your license plate data in the drive through. So they have license plate plus voice. Since this is a research project, its legal for them to lookup the vehicle owner from the license plate as long as they don't disclose that information or contact the people. See U.S. Code 18 2721. Much easier to know your demographics with your name and address.

    Keep spying on me MCD, its making your food taste even worse.

    • Why go through the bother? You just handed them a credit card with your name printed on it.

      • I like cash. But yeah, same idea. This level of creepy is not necessary, retail of all kinds is really dystopia. They can also grab bluetooth and wifi signals as you drive through. There is definitely video too. You can deliver quite a profile in just a few minutes in the drive through. Is that really necessary to sell more burgers? Why is it all about data scraping customers?

        • I don't think they are scraping all of this data, I think they are just trying to improve their voice recognition accuracy. I support that, who wants to order fries and get pies instead?

    • And, you are probably an escaped drug addict from a local rehab center that you were sentenced to after being arrested in a drug house. Because probably, right?
  • Time to call up my least favorite company's automated phone system, and collect $5,000 for each violation when their computer processes my voice without my written permission.

  • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Saturday June 12, 2021 @01:31PM (#61480420)
    and carry on with the behavior. Then they'll lobby for an exception to the law. I guess the lawyer will make a few million bucks off it.
  • No private entity may collect, capture, purchase, receive through trade, or otherwise obtain a person's or a customer's biometric identifier or biometric information.

    Once you realize you've outlawed phones, it's a lot easier to realize you have also outlawed all forms of conventional oldschool human communication. (At least email, SMS, and even writing letters remain legal. Just remember: NO DICTATION! And if you do write a letter, please scan it, expand or reduce the size by an random amount, and print tha

  • . . . eats McDonald's.

    How do they stay in business ?

Genius is ten percent inspiration and fifty percent capital gains.

Working...