Siri 'Unintentionally' Recorded Private Convos; Apple Agrees To Pay $95 Million (arstechnica.com) 48
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Apple has agreed (PDF) to pay $95 million to settle a lawsuit alleging that its voice assistant Siri routinely recorded private conversations that were then sold to third parties for targeted ads. In the proposed class-action settlement (PDF) -- which comes after five years of litigation -- Apple admitted to no wrongdoing. Instead, the settlement refers to "unintentional" Siri activations that occurred after the "Hey, Siri" feature was introduced in 2014, where recordings were apparently prompted without users ever saying the trigger words, "Hey, Siri." Sometimes Siri would be inadvertently activated, a whistleblower told The Guardian, when an Apple Watch was raised and speech was detected. The only clue that users seemingly had of Siri's alleged spying was eerily accurate targeted ads that appeared after they had just been talking about specific items like Air Jordans or brands like Olive Garden, Reuters noted. It's currently unknown how many customers were affected, but if the settlement is approved, the tech giant has offered up to $20 per Siri-enabled device for any customers who made purchases between September 17, 2014, and December 31, 2024. That includes iPhones, iPads, Apple Watches, MacBooks, HomePods, iPod touches, and Apple TVs, the settlement agreement noted. Each customer can submit claims for up to five devices.
A hearing when the settlement could be approved is currently scheduled for February 14. If the settlement is certified, Apple will send notices to all affected customers. Through the settlement, customers can not only get monetary relief but also ensure that their private phone calls are permanently deleted. While the settlement appears to be a victory for Apple users after months of mediation, it potentially lets Apple off the hook pretty cheaply. If the court had certified the class action and Apple users had won, Apple could've been fined more than $1.5 billion under the Wiretap Act alone, court filings showed. But lawyers representing Apple users decided to settle, partly because data privacy law is still a "developing area of law imposing inherent risks that a new decision could shift the legal landscape as to the certifiability of a class, liability, and damages," the motion to approve the settlement agreement said. It was also possible that the class size could be significantly narrowed through ongoing litigation, if the court determined that Apple users had to prove their calls had been recorded through an incidental Siri activation -- potentially reducing recoverable damages for everyone.
A hearing when the settlement could be approved is currently scheduled for February 14. If the settlement is certified, Apple will send notices to all affected customers. Through the settlement, customers can not only get monetary relief but also ensure that their private phone calls are permanently deleted. While the settlement appears to be a victory for Apple users after months of mediation, it potentially lets Apple off the hook pretty cheaply. If the court had certified the class action and Apple users had won, Apple could've been fined more than $1.5 billion under the Wiretap Act alone, court filings showed. But lawyers representing Apple users decided to settle, partly because data privacy law is still a "developing area of law imposing inherent risks that a new decision could shift the legal landscape as to the certifiability of a class, liability, and damages," the motion to approve the settlement agreement said. It was also possible that the class size could be significantly narrowed through ongoing litigation, if the court determined that Apple users had to prove their calls had been recorded through an incidental Siri activation -- potentially reducing recoverable damages for everyone.
Bwahahahahaha!! (Score:1)
Unintentionally My Ass (Score:2, Insightful)
What a load of lies. It will never end.
Re: (Score:2)
What a load of lies. It will never end.
Prove it.
The Plaintiffs sure didn't. Not one single bit of Direct Evidence. Not one.
Where are the Packet Sniffer logs showing unexplained Outbound Traffic from Apple Devices, from when the Device was ostensibly "just sitting there"?
Thought so.
Sure, Apple knew nothing about it. (Score:5, Interesting)
Thats a good cover story, they knew they were selling ads from private conversations. Data is too valuable, companies can't resist the money they can make off of it.
Re: (Score:2)
What did they slip on a banana peel and sell voice recordings to ad corps?
Oopsies?
What's going on here - is a court just covering for Apple? The news is always wrong too so maybe more context will come to light.
The last class action I was in... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
And in this case, just take a guess who's online store it will be useable at?
Apple's 30% margin will essentially act as a 30% or more discount on the payout.
Re: (Score:2)
You were free to bring your own action against the company. But your actual damages wouldn't cover the cost of the attorneys.
This case lasted over 10 years. How much time and money were spent by the attorneys pursuing this case? Remember, none of the attorneys were getting paid for this, so all that billable time and money, plus hiring things like experts and such came out of their pockets until the case is settled.
If you think a few million is too much money for basi
Wow, $20? (Score:2)
That's not even enough to buy a new (Apple-TM) dongle!
No wonder Apple's the #1 market cap company in the world.
Backups? (Score:5, Insightful)
Permanently deleted off backups too? sounds very unlikely
Peanuts (Score:3)
An average payout will be $1.99 and affected people will get it as a credit in Apple Store. Apple should be forced to clean up any and every instance of that leaked data. They should be forced to train any 3rd party of a party of a 3rd party and ask for deletion all the way down. They should ensure every bit of that information is scrubbed and any AI models trained on it eradicated. They should be forced to do it and to fight any legal parties with 3rd parties to get it done. That would be the only justice and only compensation for they done. Asking forgiveness rather than permission is just not good enough and most companies will keep following this "permission model" until there are real consequences for the perpetrators, including jail time for directors.
Re: (Score:2)
What they must do is be clear ahead of time that this is possible, and also be clear each time siri is activated. On Android, my phone chimes each time "OK google" is activated. Does iOS not do that?
Re: Peanuts (Score:2)
Yes iOS does that. Iâ(TM)ve said some things that triggered Siri to start listening that were vaguely similar sounding. âoeHi Sammyâ to my son, âoecome here Dashyâ to my dog, Dash, etc. nothing evil imho but a bit brain dead.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes iOS does that. Iâ(TM)ve said some things that triggered Siri to start listening that were vaguely similar sounding. âoeHi Sammyâ to my son, âoecome here Dashyâ to my dog, Dash, etc. nothing evil imho but a bit brain dead.
Remember, Apple isn't using the powerful voice recognition of its Servers to listen for the "Hey Siri" Trigger Phrase. Instead, it uses a tiny, ultra-low-power subprocessor so that it can listen-for the Trigger Phrase On-Device. So naturally, it occasionally gets it wrong.
No great Conspiracy; just the limits of current technology.
Re: (Score:2)
No great Conspiracy; just the limits of current technology.
Indeed
Multiple levels of bad here. (Score:3, Insightful)
I wonder if the Reuters article that has two anecdotal examples of Siri data being sold for targeting marketing is backed up by proof. That seems really, really bad to me and would cause me to rethinking paying a premium for Apple level "privacy."
Reuters
"Two plaintiffs said their mentions of Air Jordan sneakers and Olive Garden restaurants triggered ads for those products. Another said he got ads for a brand name surgical treatment after discussing it, he thought privately, with his doctor."
This part from the Guardian article where a contractor said the below also seems bad.
Guardian
"As well as the discomfort they felt listening to such private information, the contractor said they were motivated to go public about their job because of their fears that such information could be misused. “There’s not much vetting of who works there, and the amount of data that we’re free to look through seems quite broad. It wouldn’t be difficult to identify the person that you’re listening to, especially with accidental triggers – addresses, names and so on."
My expectation, again paying a premium for Apple level "privacy" is that there is vetting and adequate controls to ensure that contractors or employees can't listen to my private conversations and identify who I am. This seems like an easily exploitable vector to ease drop on all types of people - important and common.
I realize any device that connects online or data that gets uploaded to the cloud has a less than zero chance of being used to market or exploit me, but I was hoping Apple was different. I already employ a lot of tools to keep my data private which causes all level of problems communicating with others and conducting business online.
It feel like an increasingly unwinnable battle to use technology for convenience and efficiency while also maintaining a reasonable amount of privacy. That off grid cabin in the woods is looking ever more appealing. Grrrr.
Re: (Score:2)
Many years ago my wife and I were discussing favorite childhood hobbies. I mentioned a model I had built about twelve or thirteen copies of to hang from my ceiling in large formation. I hadn't really mentioned or looked at pictures of that model since I moved out of my childhood home, some two decades and change earlier. The next morning, eBay had sent me several auction links for that specific model. I remember telling people about it and thinking it had to be our iPhones. I was told, unequivocally, that I
Fuck Apple (Score:5, Informative)
$20 per Siri-enabled device for any customers who made purchases between September 17, 2014, and December 31, 2024. ... Each customer can submit claims for up to five devices.
Fuck Apple! Nearly every Apple device customer has Apple ID registered for every device they bought, every Apple ID is linked to a email address and probably a credit card, and each Apple device has a unique ID. Apple knew full well who bought which device when and is able to contact nearly every customer, and credit most of their cards directly without being asked.
BUT, they choose to pull this bullshit move to force their paying customers to go through hoops to submit claims just to save some dollars, instead of doing the right thing and directly credit to our Apple IDs.
This is adding insult to injury, I will think twice about buying another Apple device from now on. It is time to look for another ecosystem to migrate away from Apple.
Re: (Score:3)
Support open standards and you won't be locked into some private company's 'ecosystem'. Prefer websites over apps and improved standards for PWAs for a start. It's our current best way out of the app hell we've found ourselves.
Re: (Score:2)
"Prefer websites over apps..."
Hold on, there. As a writer, I get told a *LOT* that my best bet is cloud everything, always. I have yet to find a cloud writing app that doesn't suck up all that writing for an AI training set. How is handing all our data directly to a tech company better than having on-system apps? I don't disagree that open standards are better, and use Linux and Emacs with various add-ons for most of my writing today, but I can't let a passing comment about supporting websites over apps go
Re: (Score:1)
Well at least they stopped surreptitiously collecting any of our personal info - and they would never do it again.
Re: (Score:2)
This is adding insult to injury, I will think twice about buying another Apple device from now on. It is time to look for another ecosystem to migrate away from Apple.
I already did... I've owned exactly one Apple product and it showed me just how terrible they were.
However I've been saying this for years, of course Apple have been spying on you, just like Google and Meta with one really, really, reeeeeeeaaally big exception... Apple lied about doing it. With Google and Meta you knew they were doing it, you had some reassurance that your data was anonymised and you also knew how to take steps to minimise your exposure. With Apple, you had no idea (well I did, but I dig
I would like to see retraction articles (Score:3)
https://gizmodo.com/your-phone... [gizmodo.com]
https://arstechnica.com/gadget... [arstechnica.com]
Yeah, turns out these articles were wrong and Apple was having you gaslight everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://gizmodo.com/your-phone... [gizmodo.com]
https://arstechnica.com/gadget... [arstechnica.com]
Yeah, turns out these articles were wrong and Apple was having you gaslight everyone.
But here's the problem: PROOF that Apple is doing this. So far, all we see is Anecdotes. TFS even states that no actual PROOF exists.
And as I have said many times: SOMEBODY would have caught their iPhone streaming data to SOME IP when the phone was supposedly "just sitting there"; but they have not. After 10 years of this BULLSHIT, all we have are Anecdotes. Your cited Ars Technica Article points this glaring evidentiary insufficiency out quite succinctly, to wit:
Before Cox Media Group sent its statement, t
limited at 5!?!? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of electronic sex toys have headphone output now, some of the better ones even have Bluetooth. Or so I've been told.
These lawsuits should not be allowed to settle (Score:2)
Assume the whole thing is an orchestrated affair to limit (and pin down) liability for past wrongs. Assume both parties were always on the same page.
Google, Amazon and the rest ... (Score:2)
are prolly doing similar - but just have not been taken to court -- yet. Any compensation should be at least three times what they made by selling personal information and should be paid directly to bank accounts -- which most of them know -- to avoid the hassle of claiming which means that many will not bother. The compensation to individuals should be on top of what the lawyers get paid.
Re: (Score:2)
The crime here is that they spied on users while telling users specifically that they werent spying on them.
This crime has nothing to do with how much they sold the data for. Its as if its ok then if they didnt sell the data,, three times zero is zero
The fine should have been crushing. Full stop.
Re: (Score:2)
The fine should have been crushing. Full stop.
The fine should deter Apple, and others, from doing similar again. If not then it is just a tax - a business cost.
Re: (Score:2)
The punishment should fit the crime.
The crime here is that they spied on users while telling users specifically that they werent spying on them.
This crime has nothing to do with how much they sold the data for. Its as if its ok then if they didnt sell the data,, three times zero is zero
The fine should have been crushing. Full stop.
Problem is... PROOF.
There is none. Nothing but anecdotes. Years later, and not one Wireshark or other Packet-Sniffer log of stuff being sent ANYWHERE when an Apple Device is supposedly "just sitting there".
If the Complainants had that, it would have been the subject of Articles LONG ago.
But it hasn't. Not even once.
Telling.
Class action justice has been served (Score:2)
Your priceless privacy has been thoroughly invaded but you'll get your $1.79 check in the mail soon, or a rebate on future Apple products redeemable at any Apple store. And it only cost Apple a thousands of a month's worth of profits [apple.com].
Aah, the sweet, sweet taste of justice...
Too little (Score:2)
There should have been two more zeros to that number.
$95M out of $4T (Score:2)
Wow, that will teach them. That's .002% of their market cap. They won't do anything like that anytime soon, I can tell you.
On the plus side (Score:2)
At least we can now stop hearing from iFanboys about how Apple respects their privacy, fucking softbrains.
Re: (Score:2)
At least we can now stop hearing from iFanboys about how Apple respects their privacy, fucking softbrains.
Show me an outgoing packet sniffer log showing unexplained outgoing traffic from an Apple device that was ostensibly "just sitting there", and I'll be inclined to consider it. Bonus points if it is targeting an Apple IP!
But, AFAICT, no one has come forth with anything but anecdotes for a fucking DECADE! So, please excuse my skepticism. . .