• FTC Encouraged to Consider Privacy Implications of Uber's iOS, Android Apps



    This morning, Uber was targeted by a digital-privacy group with strong encouragement for the digital taxi-finding service to carefully consider the privacy implications of its recent decisions governing the platform's iOS and Android applications.

    The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in Washington, D.C. tells the FCC in a formal complaint that Uber should not track customers at times when they aren't using the app. The complaint comes just as Uber plans to make a big policy change in the middle of next month.

    Under Uber’s new privacy policy, which is scheduled to go into effect July 15, the ride-sharing service plans to seek customers’ permission to collect location and address book information when the app is running in the background, according to the complaint...
    As a complaint summary from Bloomberg notes, the privacy watchdog group contends that Uber doesn't need to track users when they aren't actively using the service.

    “What the company calls a privacy announcement actually serves a different purpose,” said Julia Horwitz. “It actually gives the company many more permissions.”

    Uber maintains that users have the ability to opt-out of these particular tracking features (but as the complaint notes, iOS users have more flexibility on disabling these permissions than Android users do).

    Source: Bloomberg
    This article was originally published in forum thread: FTC Encouraged to Consider Privacy Implications of Uber's iOS, Android Apps started by Michael Essany View original post
    Comments 6 Comments
    1. edwilk55's Avatar
      edwilk55 -
      They're already stomping on your 2nd amendment rights. What makes anything thing they give two chits about stomping on any other right?

      I'm done with them. Competition is king and they aren't the only game in town any more. And I just don't trust them!
    1. SpiderManAPV's Avatar
      SpiderManAPV -
      Quote Originally Posted by edwilk55 View Post
      They're already stomping on your 2nd amendment rights. What makes anything thing they give two chits about stomping on any other right?

      I'm done with them. Competition is king and they aren't the only game in town any more. And I just don't trust them!
      I’m pretty pro-2nd Amendment, but there is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting rules by your employer to limit weapons. Is it a dumb rule, yeah. Is it breaking 2nd Amendment rights? No.
    1. Tigir's Avatar
      Tigir -
      Uber is not an employer, they offer contracts. All drivers are independent contractors. Uber must abide by the laws of the State in which the contract between the Driver and Passenger is created NOT Uber's home location.
    1. SpiderManAPV's Avatar
      SpiderManAPV -
      Quote Originally Posted by Tigir View Post
      Uber is not an employer, they offer contracts. All drivers are independent contractors. Uber must abide by the laws of the State in which the contract between the Driver and Passenger is created NOT Uber's home location.
      Didn’t the state of California just rule that drivers were employees?
    1. thazsar's Avatar
      thazsar -
      Quote Originally Posted by SpiderManAPV View Post
      Didn’t the state of California just rule that drivers were employees?
      If that were the case, then Uber would be required to pay taxes on all their 'employees.' It makes more sense that the drivers would be independent contractors, therefore, Uber has no authority over them except for whenever the driver is driving for them.
  • Connect With Us

  • Twitter Box

  • Facebook