Tile Ads Undetectable Anti-Theft Mode To Tracking Devices, With $1 Million Fine...
source link: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/23/02/17/2151258/tile-ads-undetectable-anti-theft-mode-to-tracking-devices-with-1-million-fine-if-used-for-stalking
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
Tile Ads Undetectable Anti-Theft Mode To Tracking Devices, With $1 Million Fine If Used For Stalking
Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook
binspamdupenotthebestofftopicslownewsdaystalestupid freshfunnyinsightfulinterestingmaybe offtopicflamebaittrollredundantoverrated insightfulinterestinginformativefunnyunderrated descriptive typodupeerror
Sign up for the Slashdot newsletter! or check out the new Slashdot job board to browse remote jobs or jobs in your area.
The Anti-Theft Mode option is meant to make it easier to locate stolen items by preventing thieves from knowing an item is being tracked. Tile points out that in addition to Anti-Theft Mode, its trackers do not notify nearby smartphone users when an unknown Bluetooth tracker is traveling with them, making them more useful for tracking stolen items than AirTags. Apple has added alerts for nearby AirTags to prevent AirTags from being used for tracking people. Enabling Anti-Theft mode will require users to link a government-issued ID card to their Tile account, submitting to an "advanced ID verification process" that uses a biometric scan to detect fake IDs. [...] Anti-Theft Mode is rolling out to Tile users starting today, and will be available to all users in the coming weeks.
-
›
People breaking the law are worried about breaking the law.
-
by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Friday February 17, 2023 @06:34PM (#63302475)
Plus Tile can't "fine" someone... at best they can make a contract stipulation which may or may be enforceable.
-
Indeed. And even if it is enforceable, that can only be done in a civil action, in court. And even if they win, the people who are using these things to stalk their ex aren't going to have a million dollars, or a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of, anyway.
It's all marketing hype, of the sort that clearly says "Don't take us seriously. Just buy our stuff and shut up."
-
There are rules about this in most jurisdictions regarding what can be put in contracts. The general rule of thumb is that only the state/government may impose penalties and you may violate contracts freely so long as you pay compensation for the violation as compensatory damages. Punitive damages are not allowed in contracts generally.
-
They also can't stop third party apps from scanning for their devices. They have to be broadcasting in order to work.
The problem at the moment is that most phones don't have an way to detect these things in the background and warn the user. Even iPhones only scan for AirTags, not Tile ones. It's going to require a change at the OS level because no app will be able to manage background scanning in a power efficient way.
-
-
-
First they sell you the tag. Then they sell you untraceable tags. Then they sell you penetrating the untraceability. Then they sell you super-extra untraceability.
What a racket.
-
I think we can go deeper. The next obvious step would be to sell a method to override the super-extra untraceable functionality, and so on. It's profit all the way down!
-
-
by devslash0 ( 4203435 ) on Friday February 17, 2023 @06:38PM (#63302485)
How about running a basic spell checker on the article first?
-
Thanks. I was trying to figure out what use an undetectable advertisement was.
Bloody editors are always leaving words out of headlines, so we are used to the grammar being a challenge to decipher.
some examples:
1. British Left Waffles on Falkland Islands
2. Dr. Ruth to Talk about Sex with Newspaper Editorshttps://www.departments.buckne... [bucknell.edu]
-
Was that a regular waffle or a Belgian waffle?/s
-
-
The directly previous story uses "Ads" as a word, so a simple spellchecker wouldn't have helped.
It needs a human proud enough of their job to check what they write. -
Spell checker wouldn't flag "ads" being used instead of "adds".
-
It was a freudian slip, since the article was an ad for Tile
-
-
It's not a fine. A fine is part of a sentencing, and goes to government. Apparently it's only applied to users convicted of stalking. It could be a document where customer agrees that being convicted of stalking using Tile services damages Tile's reputation and reduces their potential business, in an amount estimated to up to 1 million dollar. This makes it easier for Tile to later sue for damages. It's not that the paper has any legal value by itself and transforms itself into a fine or debt, but it's an argument they can trivially use in court: the customer could not ignore the damage that they behaviour caused to Tile, as they even signed this piece of paper acknowledging it. It does not mean they are going to try collect the money, it's a threat of screwing someone's life over by destroying their credit rating (large unpayable debt).
-
or at least it didn't used to be, our legal system is kind of a mess what with all the multi-nationals and regulatory capture, but last I heard private corporations can't levy fines.
-
Termination fees in cellular contracts used to be a common thing. If left unpaid, the carriers usually wouldn't sue to collect the debt, they typically would just sell it to a third party debt collector who would then report it to the credit bureaus, which dinged your credit.
It's entirely possible that should it be litigated, a judge would find the million dollar amount to be unreasonable due to not being an amount based on actual losses or damages incurred. It's the same reason you'd be very unlikely to
-
-
It could be a document where customer agrees that being convicted of stalking using Tile services damages Tile's reputation and reduces their potential business, in an amount estimated to up to 1 million dollar.
Thanks for the analysis, lawyer. However, a customer "agreeing" that damages are of a certain monetary value is not anything any serious court would take into consideration when calculating damages in a civil trial.
-
I know. That's what I wrote. It does not transform into money, it just clears it that they could claimed they ignored causing damage, as they signed a piece of paper. I'm not a lawyer, I have heard a similar analysis from my actual lawyer.
-
Perhaps. But are you going to risk the courts coming to the conclusion that $1M is reasonable because Tile's reputation and market is substantially damaged by customers not following through on their commitment to not use the device for tracking purposes?
Anyway, this contract case would not likely be about “damages”. The case would likely just be about completing your side of the contract. You agreed that if you used the Tile in a certain way you would pay $1M. If the court determines you used t
-
I'd just argue in court that they damaged their own reputation by implementing a stalking-mode and only superficially protecting it with legalese. They determined the anti-theft functionality was more valuable to them than the stalking risk and any reputational damage from that active change to their device is on them, there's no expectation a TOS is going to stop a criminal, therefore the TOS is invalid and the criminal doesn't owe money for the reputational damage that the company did to themselves by ch
-
-
It's called liquidated damages. While *this* particular example is not very likely to hold a single drop of water, "a customer "agreeing" that damages are of a certain monetary value" is, in fact, very much something "any serious court would take into consideration when calculating damages in a civil trial."
Thank you for the expert analysis though, lawyer.
-
-
If it only applies to someone convicted of criminal stalking, they really aren't going to give a damn about a civil judgement that's 100% uncollectible anyway.
-
It's probably useful to Tile as PR. They can publicly claim to take measures against stalking, and say they're better than some fruity competitor. That "1 million" line is the modern equivalent of "you shall be accursed to the thirteenth generation".
-
-
They are looking for a competitive and sticking in a COA addendum. It is like Ring saying you are not supposed to use their doorbell cameras to surveillance public property. Executive in the case of Tile the prospect of human harm should make any property loss argument moot. It is like selling a taser and saying it should not be used. As stated, a conviction of stalking has to be had, and lawsuits have to be made. It does not help the dead person in the alley stalked and the Tile tracker retrieved.
-
Tile will probably get sued by one of the victims. The standard of proof in civil court is lower than for criminal court, so they could be in a situation where there is no conviction but they still lose.
Even if there was a conviction, what are the chances of recovering $1 million? That person is probably a family member of the victim, so forcing sale of their house will just make the victim homeless. The award in any lawsuit will probably be a lot more than $1 million.
-
-
If you're using a tag to track your stolen item, aren't you therefore tracking the thief without his consent? Or does Tile's EULA specifically have an exception for this situation where you're off the hook for the $1mil fine when you're using it to track a bad guy, and does it say how bad the bad guy has to be?
-
Probable legal argument is you are tracking your stolen property to expedite recovery.
In a court of law the tracker would not be sufficient evidence ("beyond reasonable doubt") that any person that is found when the stolen property is recovered is the original perpetrator that committed the original theft (could of been traded several times to an unsuspecting third party). At which point some traditional investigation work will be required to track back to the original perpetrator (if it is worth the effort
-
Not only that but the idea that even the person who “took” your item is a thief and “the bad guy” is disputable. They could be mistaken for example, and never intended to steal and suddenly you’re out a million dollars in a lawsuit for just keeping tabs on your belongings.
-
-
No. There's this thing called intent.
-
-
Each time the device is used for stalking the company should pay the person stalked, and any company that helped detect the stalking, one million dollars per offense. Then MAYBE I'll consider making this OK to do...
-
At some point, I expect if there isnâ(TM)t already, there will be a DIY for rolling your very own stalker hobbyist kit. Theyâ(TM)ll have hardware recommendations and probably some software tools, libraries , etc to compliment the hardware. If android tries to make it harder to install spyware, I could even envision them having their own build with things like kernel modules to make dumping memory easier. âoeMerry Christmas baby! Hereâ(TM)s a new phone!â And sheâ(TM)s like,
-
There already exist hardware stalkers could use. The concern with things like the Tiles and Airtags is that these solutions Utilize a large network from their installed base of people running the app. which is very unique and makes the cost massively lower.
Basically everyone with an iPhone or tile app. is working together to report on your location, which offloads the hardware requirements to a huge network of smartphone users. Without the assist from the tile app or from the iPhone system sof
-
But not much more. A slightly larger device, a somewhat shorter battery life (60 days) [bestbuy.com]. Roughly the same price. You can buy it at BestBuy.
-
-
-
-
So the thief has to give consent or you’re out a million dollars in a lawsuit. Makes zero sense. How about instead of unenforceable BS in the TOS they just agree to comply with any laws. You can drive a car on the road and follow the rules or it can be used to run people down and commit crimes. You don’t sign a 1m usd TOS to buy a car, the courts simply take yours away and lock you up for bad behavior.
-
And then accuse them of stalking me? Sounds like a really easy way for abusers who have already successfully weaponized the system against their victims to get a corporation to do their dirty work for them too.
Remember when paypal tried to set up their EULA to demand that they be allowed to fine anyone who said anything they disagree with online and it blew up in their face? This is the "think of the women and children" moment that's going to let corporations turn the heat up on the frog without it jumping out.
-
Ignoring the ways this might be leveraged in unplanned ways if it actually worked in a useful manner, let's look at the technology and why it doesn't matter because it's mostly useless.
These are Bluetooth devices. Typically this means short range! While there have been demonstrations of well over a kilometer using giant parabolic dishes over featureless desert terrain, this is not representative of typical use. Tile specs their ranges as up to 250 ft except for the large pro version which is up to 400 f -
Has anyone actually gotten a Tile product to work properly.
We had a few but stopped using them because they wouldn't respond, or battery covers fell off, or they wouldn't show up a location.-
Doesn't Tile need lots of people having the app installed on their phone? Or do they now rely on Apple's AirTags technology? If the former, I can assume it's basically worthless in large swaths of the world (Europe, for example).
-
-
Tile does realize that contracts can't impose fines in most jurisdictions right? Punitive damage awards aren't allowed as liquidated damages in near all jurisdictions.
-
Most people committing crimes do so under the assumption that they aren't caught. And from those who do take that into account, a large part don't care.
How do you take 1 million from somebody who has 200 USD in their name?
Most stalkers are low-lifers. If they had a million, they'd hide their doings behind a legal shell-company.
Recommend
About Joyk
Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK