TcM482hb

In order for Amazon or Google to be charged, a state prosecutor would have to be interested enough in the case to decide to prosecute it. Most likely, given that the case would be against a big company, the trial would take years. In order for a prosecutor to be willing to commit that kind of time to a case, there would have to be a big public outcry. So, if you want Google or Amazon to be held responsible, you need to complain to the right people in your state governments.

GreatWhiteNorth

People were told.

UndeadTed

Because a state can't charge a Federal run operation

i_scream_trucks

You gave consent to it when you signed up for their service.

crazy_eyes

what if your devices listens to me talk to you, i did not give your device consent, even if you did

Being

Probably because we all agree to the privacy policy without reading it.

ALIENS2222

They are the government... The government will never ever EVER arrest itself. Only us lowly taxslaves are subject to that.

Nosense

Exactly this. They work hand in hand. The President was spied on and nothing is happening, they damn sure wont do anything about us being violated.

cthulian_axioms

It's quite simple.

Money is our god now. It is more important than law, more important than human rights, more important than the health of the planet, more important than anything else in the universe. It is literally the only thing that matters in the modern world.

The only thing required to place oneself or one's company above the law is a sufficient amount of money.

ANannyMouse

It would be illegal in all 50 states.

2-party consent is when both people in the conversation consent to the recording. This is legal in every state.

1-party consent requires that only one person in the conversation consent to recording. This is what the article is referring to and is legal in some states.

0-party consent is when nobody in the conversation is aware they're being recorded. This is what google is doing and it is illegal in EVERY state. Google is not a party in your conversation, 1-party consent does not apply to them.

glassuser

Except that google will sneak terms in to the alexa license or whatever so that the part that "owns" it has consented, even if they don't realize it.

Frankeh

that would be a bad faith contract and be void, you can't TOS your way out of following the law

crazy_eyes

What if you have a goodle device listening in when I am having an in person conversation with somebody, I never accepted the EULA so my privacy should not be invaded by them legally

ANannyMouse

Oh, yuck. I wonder if that would hold up in court. One might be able to argue the party consenting has to be the one doing the recording and not an unrelated third party. But I don't know the law well enough to say for sure. But yeah, that sucks.

FecalDemiurge6000

To the top with this.

Diogenes_The_Cynic

Their door microphones are completely illegal.

rejectedfromreddit

The argument is that you're in a "public space" with no expectation of privacy, just by virtue of being outside. It's the same way private companies justify tracking all of the cars that travel down a particular road/highway.

Qfan2020

Great point! These companies should be sued for illegal spying. It seems like the only way to protect our unalienable rights (things we assume companies should also do because they shouldn't want to break the law) is to sue!

Tallest_Skil

Because the rule of law hasn't existed for over a century.

Trumpocrat2020

Because they are told in the 6 miles of ToS.

cm18

If I don't have a cell phone but my friend has a phone and it is recording, then it is violating my privacy.

SirNiggsalot

Yup.

senpaithatignoresyou

The trick is to put a tax on electronic terms of service that is longer than 4 pages. Or a data gathering tax.

The trick to fighting corporate America, is to tax their shenanigans. A blanket tax is not targeting the wrong doers, and they always come out of the woodwork to lobby against it, exposing themselves.

rejectedfromreddit

It's a great idea, but (((they))) will just create an evil version of the UCC or municipalities incorporating the NFPA and electrical codes.

Line 1 of their EULA will be "These Terms of Service include the contents of Standard Evil Contract", since most of the stuff (severablity, no privacy rights, licensing/not ownership, and no liability) is standard anyway.

I'd like to start with a law requiring them to notify you proactively (with 45-90 days notice) that the terms are changing, rather than just updating them on the website and not telling you. If they can send me spam, they can send me legal updates.

ALIENS2222

You get 10 words free... Every word past the 10 words will be an exponent on your tax of 2$ so you got 20 words 2.0x10 10

1moar

Exactly this.