Settlement Reached!( for the Gratis breaking our privacy)

Live forum: http://forum.freeipodguide.com/viewtopic.php?t=35288

Iloveipods2

15-03-2006 08:56:40

http//www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/031306InternetBreach.html[]http//www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/031306InternetBreach.html

[quoteef32a5da9f]Settlement Reached In Internet Breach of Privacy Case

ALBANY---A settlement to address what may have been the largest breach of privacy in internet history has been announced by the state Attorney General’s office.

The settlement with Datran Media, a leading e-mail marketer, follows an investigation that identified the improper disclosure of the personal information of more than six million American consumers.

"With this case, we hope to set a new standard for internet marketers and consumer research companies," AG Eliot Spitzer said. "Personal information secured through a promise of confidentiality must always remain confidential."

Datran was alleged to have improperly used information it had obtained from several companies that compile and sell information on consumers.

The largest such company, Gratis Internet, had assured consumers on several web sites it owned and operated that it would "never lend, sell or give out for any reason" the information provided by users. Among the sites on which Gratis collected user information were "freeipods.com" and "freedvds.com."

The Attorney General’s investigation revealed that Datran knew of Gratis’ promise to consumers when it purchased the consumer lists. But after obtaining these lists, Datran sent millions of unsolicited e-mails to the listed consumers. The seven million files that Gratis sold to Datran is believed to be the largest deliberate breach of a privacy policy discovered by U.S. law enforcement to date.

Under an Assurance of Discontinuance with the Attorney General, Datran has agreed to pay $1.1 million as penalties, disgorgement and costs. Datran must also

-- Destroy the information obtained from Gratis and the other list sellers at issue;

--Avoid acquisition of any personal consumer information without first independently confirming that such acquisition is permissible under relevant seller privacy policies; and

--Appoint a Chief Privacy Officer or other employee to oversee privacy compliance efforts.

Spitzer noted that Datran cooperated fully with his office’s investigation, and that the company began improving its list purchasing and due diligence practices in April 2005, just prior to the commencement of the investigation.

Beth Givens, director of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, a consumer advocacy organization hailed the settlement.

"A privacy policy is more than an empty promise. Companies must be held to their word. Attorney General Spitzer sends an important message to any company that would violate the terms of an agreement of a data seller."

Spitzer said he hoped the case would help establish basic controls on data compiled and sold by professional consumer research companies and list builders. "Companies must adhere to known privacy policies and promises. Failing to do so constitutes a clear consumer fraud," said Spitzer.

Spitzer’s office is continuing an investigation into Gratis and other companies that compile and sell consumer information. 3-13-06[/quoteef32a5da9f]


Sorry if i'm double threading(as in this has been posted before ? ) anyways I first heard it on NPR and I'm searching like crazy for an article on NPR. It was like an interview or something.

Anyways, I'm still shocked sometimes thinking they sold over 6 million people's data. and kinda sad because both Datran and Gratis were fully aware of what was happening. cry

ghondi

15-03-2006 09:20:45

Damn.

Bastages selling peoples info....

VrExe

15-03-2006 09:26:23

Interesting...

EatChex89

15-03-2006 10:49:21

wow

KeithA

15-03-2006 11:40:02

I would imagine that, in addition to all of the other challenges Freepay is facing, an inquiry by Eliot Spitzer could prove a bit...distracting.

MightyMouse

15-03-2006 12:04:48

When you consider Freepay's business model, it's not hard to understand why they sold our information.

Truth be told, I just assumed it was being sold from the get-go. shrug

Akademikz

15-03-2006 12:06:23

I demand compensation, hehe... P

ajrock2000

15-03-2006 12:06:38

[quotee4c36606e9="MightyMouse"]When you consider Freepay's business model, it's not hard to understand why they sold our information.

Truth be told, I just assumed it was being sold from the get-go. shrug[/quotee4c36606e9]

Yeah, of course. Every business in america has its dirty little secrets.

MightyMouse

15-03-2006 12:23:08

[quotedd8470a537="ajrock2000"][quotedd8470a537="MightyMouse"]When you consider Freepay's business model, it's not hard to understand why they sold our information.

Truth be told, I just assumed it was being sold from the get-go. shrug[/quotedd8470a537]

Yeah, of course. Every business in america has its dirty little secrets.[/quotedd8470a537]

I wouldn't even call this a secret, But yes you are correct. )

Veek

15-03-2006 12:37:26

http//orlyowl.com/ashamed.jpg[" alt=""/img3e679cb090]

Crynos

15-03-2006 17:32:52

People will still defend freepay though, theyre golden and can do no wrong

turpentinedreams

15-03-2006 17:38:17

so does everyone who got their id sold get something?
i hate gratis now.

aguy

15-03-2006 17:41:19

ya am i getting somthing out of this?

CollidgeGraduit

15-03-2006 17:46:10

I guess it doesn't really bother me that much. I can throw junk mail away, and I can delete spam that ends up in my spam folder.

nick_e

15-03-2006 20:14:42

I wouldn't care if they sold my information had they said they could in there TOS but with there tendency to ban people for even minor infringments... FreePay = DQed (after I get my nano that is)

ragefu

15-03-2006 20:14:56

Yeah I don't see what the big deal about spam email is I mean we're gonna get it anyway? It's not like they're calling our house or anything

halfbreed

15-03-2006 21:17:58

[quoteaa32c87cd2="Crynos"]People will still defend freepay though, theyre golden and can do no wrong[/quoteaa32c87cd2]

Like google

tramahound

16-03-2006 06:07:30

I assumed this was being done anyway, but it's always a bit worrisome when it's being reported as if it's a crime. once they get around to giving me my final greens for the mac mini, if that ever happens, I'm done with them. things are getting too dramatic over there. i just hope like hell that they stay afloat long enough to ship me a mini! ps3 offer people should be scared I think.

doylnea

16-03-2006 07:18:56

The problem is not with them selling the email addresses, it's going against their stated policy that they wouldn't. Spitzer doesn't give a rat's ass about sold email addresses, he cares about whether his constituents have been wronged by a company operating within his jurisdiction.

hrdfarkr

16-03-2006 07:36:56

Makes this argument seem a little hypocritical (Sorry Jake)
[quote9880b63ae2="Jake"][quote9880b63ae2="pogue"][quote9880b63ae2="Jake"]If someone wants to give out their address to someone who doesn't have a privacy policy governing the way that information is used, then they are welcome to.[/quote9880b63ae2]

The privacy policy is clearly noted on the web site here http//www.care2.com/help/membership/privacy.html The site is certified by TrustE.[/quote9880b63ae2]

But if the petition and information makes its way into [i9880b63ae2]your[/i9880b63ae2] hands like you say it will before you send it, its integrity and security are not guaranteed.[/quote9880b63ae2]

Seems like Freepay/Gratis has alot on its plate these days

Brok3n_Sword

16-03-2006 10:29:16

[quotea8e5235aeb="CollidgeGraduit"]I guess it doesn't really bother me that much. I can throw junk mail away, and I can delete spam that ends up in my spam folder.[/quotea8e5235aeb]

Oh come on CG, what will it take for you to not take a bullet for freepay these days? I've seen you defend them as the xbox 360 situation grows increasingly worse.

KeithA

16-03-2006 10:37:16

More on this topic...

http//www.wired.com/news/technology/1,70420-0.html[]http//www.wired.com/news/technology/1,70420-0.html

[quoted9e3deb967][bd9e3deb967]'Free IPod' Takes Privacy Toll[/bd9e3deb967]

By Ryan Singel
0200 AM Mar, 16, 2006 EST

The big business of renting, selling and buying personal information about netizens was put on notice this week by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer in a high-profile case that exposed shady privacy practices and the dubious value of the once-promising Truste "privacy seal."

Spitzer announced Monday that e-mail marketing giant Datran Media had agreed to a $1.1 million fine for knowingly buying marketing lists from companies with privacy policies that promised not to sell or transfer the lists to a third party.

The case, which Spitzer described as the biggest violation of a privacy policy yet, promises to change the way the industry does business, said Chris Hoofnagle, an attorney with the Electronic Privacy Information Center who regularly publicized sales of lists that were supposedly protected by privacy policies.

"Every attorney that represents a list broker is going to call their client this week and say, 'This case in New York has made law, and that law says that if you are renting a list you have to make sure the seller's website's privacy policies are legitimate,'" said Hoofnagle.

Datran's biggest purchase, according to the text of the settlement (.pdf), was a list of 7.2 million Americans' names, e-mail addresses, home phone numbers and street addresses from Gratis Internet, a company best known for promising free iPods, televisions and DVDs to users willing to sign up for promotions offered by partners such as Citibank, Blockbuster and BMG's music club.

The sites inspired dozens of "Is there really such a thing as a free iPod?" stories in the press (including one by Wired News), and internet forums were packed with pleas for information on how to acquire a free version of Apple Computer's signature fetish item. The freebie required a registrant to sign up five others into the program, and eventually the legalized pyramid scheme reached its inevitable saturation point.

While many did indeed get a free iPod, all ended up with inboxes full of marketing pitches, which began showing up within hours of registering.

Gratis assured registrants they could opt out of such mailings, and claimed in its privacy policy, as of September 2004, that the company would send out marketing messages on behalf of other companies but would never sell or transfer its lists to any third party.

Those promises were not true, according to the settlement between Spitzer and Datran.

Rumblings of rogue e-mail marketing surfaced in 2004 soon after Gratis' sites were judged legitimate by press outlets and bloggers. The reports prompted Wired News to re-examine the company, and executives assured Wired News that they never sold their customers' e-mail addresses.

Seemingly bolstering its claim was the fact that Gratis' network of sites prominently displayed the logo of Truste, a nonprofit group that claims to certify and monitor website privacy and e-mail policies.

When asked by Wired News in 2004 how third-party spammers got hold of Gratis members' e-mail addresses, Truste said it could not find a problem with Gratis' practices.

"The results of our investigation indicate that Gratis Internet did not violate their privacy policy," Truste investigator Alexander Yap wrote in an October 2004 e-mail. "Truste did, however, work with them to strengthen and clarify their privacy statement."

Several months later, Truste revoked Gratis' seal of approval, then quickly reinstated it, then pulled it again, but declined to state publicly its reasons.

In the wake of this week's settlement, Truste's spokeswoman did not return repeated phone calls, and executive director Fran Maier did not respond to e-mailed questions about why Truste never discovered the alleged sale or informed the public that Gratis was not adhering to its privacy policy.

Truste has long been criticized as ineffective and too eager to make apologies for companies that violate the spirit of their privacy promises.

For its part, Datran sounded a note of contrition and passed along a warning to other marketing companies buying lists that were supposed to remain private.

"We take this matter very seriously," wrote Datran spokesman Mark Naples. "Therefore, we believe it was important to confront it head-on and resolve it quickly. Importantly, while Datran discontinued the practice in the first half of 2005 -- and began to do so before any inquiry from the attorney general -- many marketing and list-owner companies continue to engage in this practice."

Datran's contrition is enough to retain membership in the Direct Marketing Association, whose logo is prominently displayed on the company's website, according to Patricia Kachura, a DMA vice president.

"We would take the position that if the attorney general has looked into this, it sounds as if these practices have been corrected to their satisfaction, so we might look at this practice over the long term or at other companies, but I think this particular situation seems to have been resolved."

But Gratis co-founder Peter Martin disputes the allegation that his company ever sold or rented out customer information, saying that it hired Datran to work on creative design and back-office support for its e-mail campaign.

"Appointing a specialized vendor to manage such 'in-house' marketing operations is a commonplace, industry-wide practice," Martin said in an e-mail statement. "That's what happened here (between Gratis and Datran) and it is a standard and totally lawful practice."
[/quoted9e3deb967]

Iloveipods2

16-03-2006 10:51:59

is that why Freepay has been slugish, because they have an attorny general all over them?

anyways can someone find the NPR interview or report or something. I'm sure i'm not the only person taht heard it on the radio. + karma to whoever finds it. pretty insightful

Aprout

17-03-2006 15:30:00

You think Freepay will put this in the "news" section of their website.

thehacker010

17-03-2006 16:00:37

[quote250e0db196="ragefu"]Yeah I don't see what the big deal about spam email is I mean we're gonna get it anyway? It's not like they're calling our house or anything[/quote250e0db196]

I never had junk email until I joined Gratis.....

Iloveipods2

17-03-2006 17:03:36

I hate spam! evil

UniPrize Media

17-03-2006 19:02:28

Wow, this is very disturbing. I dont really care about the spam. What really matters is the violation of the trust. So does this mean we can sue them?

Buford T

21-03-2006 17:42:54

In the beginning, anyone could have gone to freeipods.com and made their own email list. Back in the day (heh...) they used to display the email address you were being referred under (during sign-up). So all a person had to do was start with a random referral number, record the referrer's (freely available) email address, add 1 to the refer number, record the next email address, and so on. It would be a bitch and take a while, but if you employed a handful of people, you could have a sizeable marketing database in a matter of days. Privacy policy or not.