Legal MumboJumbo... Tell me again why I should want to use Apps?

[NoelC]

Just poking around in the Weather App, I see a few basic configuration options, plus the following:

 

• A monstrous "Privacy Statement" shrouded in legalese and advising on the myriad ways Microsoft will be collecting information on you.
   
• An even more daunting "Microsoft Services Agreement" spewing forth such gems as:
   
  SECTION 10 CONTAINS A BINDING ARBITRATION CLAUSE
   
  and
   
  1.3 Can Microsoft change this Agreement after I've accepted it? Yes.
   
• A link to a Microsoft Online Advertising Privacy Statement that sees fit to use some very fine print in place.  Wasn't this supposed to be the new age of the 48 pt font?
     
• A link to a Third party software acknowledgements page with even more legal fine print.

 

This is the Weather App, right, not the Legal Paperwork App?

 

 

-Noel

 

[Tommy]

Just another reason why I call them crApps. What ever happened to 'programs' that basically had the same mumbo jumbo that everyone just bypassed and never read. At least we didn't have to worry about data mining and the like back in those days.

[jaclaz]

Well, it seems like the Weather App is not among the worst things around, check here:

http://thedailywtf.com/articles/you-re-welcome-

scroll down to the Samsung related snippet. ph34r:

 

jaclaz

[JorgeA]

Speaking of legal mumbo-jumbo, have you seen this thread on the Insiders Forum?

 

There's a guy there who seems to think that if you sign into any Microsoft service anywhere, not only are you signing your digital life away, but that's OK. You may as well sign into a Micrtosoft Account on Windows 10 instead of using a local account, it's a "mere formality." (See the final page or two of the thread.)

 

Paticularly truculent is his assertion that, by opening a Microsoft Account to participate in that forum, you have no grounds for complaining about Microsoft's policies. This view, if accepted, would mean that it's impossible to criticize Microsoft's privacy policies on Microsoft-run forums. Nice trick if you can pull it off.

 

Any suggestions for how to deal with the guy? He's pretty slippery. I'm leading up to making the point that the mere acceptance of Microsoft terms somewhere does not mean you are thereby subjected to them everywhere in cyberspace. Much as they might like to, Microsoft does not follow you everywhere you go on the Internet. For example, if I open a Microsoft Account to expose and criticize Microsoft's invasions of privacy, that does not mean than I am henceforth always and everywhere subjected (either technically or legally) to those invasions of privacy. If I have an account but don't use any MSFT services that require logging on (Skype, weather app, Office 365, etc.), then as far as I can tell from Microsoft's service agreement and privacy statement, Microsoft is not monitoring me. If I sign out of (or close) my Microsoft Account, I am no longer subjected to this tracking. Thus it does make a difference whether or not I sign into Windows 10, for if I did then I would be subject to such monitoring automatically, independently of what specific Microsoft services I might launch.

 

Any flaws in this analysis?

 

--JorgeA

Edited June 26, 2015 by JorgeA

[NoelC]

This view, if accepted, would mean that it's impossible to criticize Microsoft's privacy policies on Microsoft-run forums. Nice trick if you can pull it off.

 

Sorry, I can't log in there - I'm banned for criticizing Microsoft's policies.  I imagine big bad bombastic bob will be hit sooner or later.

 

SRFreeman is probably the most maddening participant there.  I came to believe, before I was pushed out, that he may be an exec at Microsoft.  There is no good way to "deal" with him.  Best to just ignore him and most certainly don't let his twisted world view get to you.

 

 

-Noel

 

 

 

P.S., A business contract trumps all else, even the Constitution of the United States.

Edited June 27, 2015 by NoelC

[JorgeA]

Funny, I had the page to that thread open on two different browsers, one logged in and the other not. I just went to refresh the page to see if there were any replies, and I'm getting a server error. "Problem loading page -- Server not found," reports Firefox, and "Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage," says IE. It's either maintenance or they've removed the thread. I guess time will tell.

 

About your account being blocked -- have you tried visiting the Insider forums without logging in?

 

Finally, there definitely is an Orwellian quality about those Microsoft forums. Posts get edited out of all recognition (it's happened to me) or they get erased, users' identities get sent down the memory hole, threads are suddenly locked for no apparent reason.

 

What do you think -- can Microsoft track people if they're not signed in to its services?

 

--JorgeA

[NoelC]

Legally or technologically?

 

Regarding the latter...  You're running their OS.  They didn't suddenly turn evil overnight.  It's been a gradual process.

 

Yes, I can visit the forum by logging out (my comments above should have given that away).  But why would I want to?

 

-Noel

[JorgeA]

Let's say legally.

 

The reason I ask is that this srfreeman claims that by assenting to the one-line banner at the top of the Microsoft forum page ("By using this site you agree to the use of cookies for analytics, personalized content and ads"), you are giving Microsoft an unlimited right to collect data on you anywhere and everywhere. To my mind this is ridiculous on its face as the actual terms and conditions that you read when clicking on the "Learn more" button say no such thing. (He even goes on to assert that simply clicking on "Learn more" signifies consent! Uhh, NO -- it's simply to learn more about the terms. I doubt that an army of Microsoft lawyers could argue successfully for his viewpoint.)

 

But let's assume that serfman (a deliberate typo) is correct and that by signing into a Microsoft service you're consenting to Microsoft's following you all around the web. In that case, would (1) signing out of the Microsoft service, and/or (2) closing your Microsoft account, put an end to this tracking and data collection? Or is it like the Hotel California, where "you can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave"?

 

--JorgeA

 

P.S. The Insiders forum page is back up.

Edited June 27, 2015 by JorgeA

[loblo]

SRFreeman is probably the most maddening participant there.  I came to believe, before I was pushed out, that he may be an exec at Microsoft.  There is no good way to "deal" with him.  Best to just ignore him and most certainly don't let his twisted world view get to you.

 

SRFreeman might well be a certain Shayne Freeman from S.R. Freeman, a guy who's got ties to Microsoft according to his small bio on the S.R. Freeman website...

 

 

[JorgeA]

^^ Nice work!

 

Putting it all together, it would not be surprising to learn that he's fully imbued with Silicon Valley techno-lust, where New is ipso facto Better, tech companies Lead the Way to the Future, and they can do no wrong.

 

--JorgeA

 

EDIT: typo

Edited June 27, 2015 by JorgeA

[JorgeA]

And speaking of this stuff, here's a funny/frightening study about T&C's:

 

It is a fact that 99 people out of 100 users downloading and installing a software rarely read the EULA / Privacy Policy / Terms and Conditions. To prove this F-Secure, the security blog made a fascinating discovery on how exactly people react to the really dumb privacy policy. Their second objective was to research on whether people would really sign up for a private open WiFi

 

[...]

 

The F-Secure experiment proves that humans are fallible to free goodies and would sign up for almost anything once they come to know it is free. Though F-Secure would never take your first born child or your beloved pet, but technically you did be required to hand over the same once you sign up for the free WiFi.

 

The text I've put in boldface explains so much...

 

--JorgeA

 

[dencorso]

How can one be sure F-Secure would never take one's first born child or one's most beloved pet, when, in fact, one has agreed for eternity to hand over the same once one signed up for the free WiFi?

[JorgeA]

The bottom line is... you can't be sure.

 

But I guess that people who have neither children nor pets will be OK. Hmm, a loophole in the EULA -- gotta fire the lawyer who wrote that section! 

 

--JorgeA

Edited June 28, 2015 by JorgeA

[jaclaz]

How can one be sure F-Secure would never take one's first born child or one's most beloved pet, when, in fact, one has agreed for eternity to hand over the same once one signed up for the free WiFi?

If you are talking of the (otherwise very nice and much beloved) family dog    that kept us (my wife and me) all night awake because there was a thunderstorm *somewhere nearby* ("nearby" here, as defined by the mentioned dog means approximately *anything within 200 Km radius*^[1]) I wonder how I can actually enforce the contract provision    and have the nice F-Secure guys take her with them.

I may even give them a monthly fee for this service.

 

Today I could have actually  signed that agreement after having read it very accurately. :angrym:

 

jaclaz

 

^[1] I quickly checked and it seems there was mild raining in an area no less than 150 Km from home.

[NoelC]

How can one be sure F-Secure would never take one's first born child or one's most beloved pet, when, in fact, one has agreed for eternity to hand over the same once one signed up for the free WiFi?

 

You can't be sure of it.  Business contracts supersede even the Constitution of the country, and they withstand challenges all the time (look up people vs. condo associations, for example).  Given the modern change in nature of corporations, where they're becoming ever more evil/predatory without bounds, this is especially disturbing.

 

-Noel