Disney has been sued for spying on Children through Games & Apps

[AlTech]

Disney has been sued for allegedly spying on Children through 42 games.

 

Quote

A federal class action lawsuit filed last week in California alleges that the Walt Disney Company is violating privacy protection laws by collecting children’s personal information from 42 of its apps and sharing the data with advertisers without parental consent.

 

The lawsuit targets Disney and three software companies — Upsight, Unity, and Kochava — alleging that the companies created mobile apps aimed at children that contained embedded software to track, collect, and then export their personal information along with information about their online behavior.

 

Quote

The plaintiff, a San Francisco woman named Amanda Rushing, says she was unaware that information about her child, “L.L.,” was collected while playing mobile game Disney Princess Palace Pets, and that data was then sold to third parties for ad targeting.

 

I find it a little disappointing that a lot of people playing a Free To Play game don't necessarily fully understand how or why they are able to play for free. I think that this is an issue companies using the Free To Play model should address.

 

In this case, the Free To Play games sold user data. 

 

Some background on what the spying is:

Quote

The class action suit says this violates the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), which was enacted by Congress in 1999 and designed to protect the privacy of children online. COPPA requires that companies designing apps for children under the age of 13 obtain consent from parents before collecting personal information.

 

Disney has responded to the lawsuit and are lawyering up faster than you can say "Guilty".

Quote

Disney has a robust COPPA compliance program, and we maintain strict data collection and use policies for Disney apps created for children and families. The complaint is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of COPPA principles, and we look forward to defending this action in court.

 

Disney is playing the "consumer doesn't understand" card and hopes that this will actually work in court.

 

Oh and here's all the games that are affected:

Quote

AvengersNet

Beauty and the Beast

Perfect Match

Cars Lightening League

Club Penguin Island

Color by Disney

Disney Color and Play

Disney Crossy Road

Disney Dream Treats

Disney Emoji Blitz

Disney Gif

Disney Jigsaw Puzzle!

Disney LOL

Disney Princess: Story Theater

Disney Store Become

Disney Story Central

Disney Magic Timer

Disney Princess: Charmed Adventures

Dodo Pop

Disney Build It Frozen

DuckTales: Remastered

Frozen Free Fall

Frozen Free Fall: Icy Shot

Good Dinosaur Storybook Deluxe

Inside Out Thought Bubbles

Maleficent Free Fall

Miles from Tomorrowland: Missions

Moana Island Life

Olaf's Adventures

Palace Pets in Whisker Haven

Sofia the First Color and Play

Sofia the First Secret Library

Star Wars: Puzzle DroidsTM

Star WarsTM: Commander

Temple Run: Oz

Temple Run: Brave

The Lion Guard

Toy Story: Story Theater

Where's My Mickey?

Where’s My Water? (paid, lite, and free)

Where's My Water? 2

Zootopia Crime Files: Hidden Object

 

Disney, Disney, Disney.... what happened? I'm really confused. I thought you were milking people dry of money by encouraging people to watch expensive movies, go to expensive theme parks etc. But you're also making money off of Children's data? I think that companies aiming to make products for children should avoid making money by collecting information or selling information. Micro-transactions are also a bad idea for children games. The only business model that I think really should be used in apps or games for Children are paid games with no built in micro-transactions.

 

But hey, what do I know? I'm not terribly interested in Walt Disney Corporation's bottom line .

 

Sources:

https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/9/16115352/disney-sued-spying-children-gaming-apps-disney-princess-palace-pets

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.disneydigitalbooks.PalacePets_goo

[vanished]

Interesting, I wouldn't expect this from them.  I get the feeling that they genuinely think there's been a misunderstanding that they can defend against, and not that they knew what they were doing all along and hoping to get away with it, but I guess we'll see.

[AlTech]

Just now, Ryan_Vickers said:

Interesting, I wouldn't expect this from them.  I get the feeling that they genuinely think there's been a misunderstanding that they can defend against, and not that they knew what they were doing all along and hoping to get away with it, but I guess we'll see.

This whole case hinges on the fact that the parents had no idea that data collection and selling had occurred.

 

The law requires that apps or games designed for children must require parents to agree to the data collection or selling of it.

[vanished]

Just now, AluminiumTech said:

This whole case hinges on the fact that the parents had no idea that data collection and selling had occurred.

 

The law requires that apps or games designed for children must require parents to agree to the data collection or selling of it.

or better yet don't put that stuff in games for kids... just not a good road to start down.

[Praesi]

I always wondered why so many former Disney Child Stars became drug addicted *****.

[Guest]

Disney cant defend themselves in this case. They think that they are innocent and haven't done anything wrong, but spying on children, seriously. 

[vanished]

This quote is particularly interesting

Quote

The plaintiff, a San Francisco woman named Amanda Rushing, says she was unaware that information about her child, “L.L.,” was collected while playing mobile game Disney Princess Palace Pets, and that data was then sold to third parties for ad targeting.

collecting the data is one thing but reselling it for ad purposes seems like it would be a whole other crime on top of the spying... I know the rules regarding advertising and kids are quite strict, at least in some places

[dizmo]

I guess Disney has to try and find revenue streams somewhere, since their TV based revenue is going to very quickly disappear. Pretty sad to see, however not overly surprising. I hope they get a very hard slap on the wrist for this.

[mr moose]

I wouldn't have thought it would be too hard to see if the ToS (that all users agree to) included all the information on what they were doing with private data.  I would imagine the case will be pretty cut and dried in one direction. 

 

 

[vanished]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I wouldn't have thought it would be too hard to see if the ToS (that all users agree to) included all the information on what they were doing with private data.  I would imagine the case will be pretty cut and dried in one direction. 

 

 

that's where the lawyers come in, pointing to past examples of where a tos was dismissed on grounds it tried to do things that shouldn't be done, or was hard to read, or something like that  

[AlTech]

19 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

This quote is particularly interesting

collecting the data is one thing but reselling it for ad purposes seems like it would be a whole other crime on top of the spying... I know the rules regarding advertising and kids are quite strict, at least in some places

Oh yeah, ADs targeted at children have totally different requirements than for Adults.

4 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

that's where the lawyers come in, pointing to past examples of where a tos was dismissed on grounds it tried to do things that shouldn't be done, or was hard to read, or something like that  

I get the feeling that these kind of cases originate roughly from The Republic of California .

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

that's where the lawyers come in, pointing to past examples of where a tos was dismissed on grounds it tried to do things that shouldn't be done, or was hard to read, or something like that  

 

I would imagine if precedent is set and the law isn't really open to interpretation it would still be a pretty straight forward case.   I Mean, it's not like they are treading new ground where they are trying to apply new conditions to archaic laws.

[Droidbot]

6 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

that's where the lawyers come in, pointing to past examples of where a tos was dismissed on grounds it tried to do things that shouldn't be done, or was hard to read, or something like that  

User under 13 accepting a legal document.. :thinking:

[Master Disaster]

18 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I wouldn't have thought it would be too hard to see if the ToS (that all users agree to) included all the information on what they were doing with private data.  I would imagine the case will be pretty cut and dried in one direction. 

 

 

A ToS, EULA, CoC or any other "legal agreement, including a legitimate contract btw" cannot supersede the law.

 

At the topic, I'd urge people to wait and see what the courts throw up before passing judgement, not that I'm defending Disney but I would wager the woman is more likely to be ignorant of the law than Disney is.

 

If Disney are found to be breaching the law then by all means, go hell for leather but I somehow doubt they'd allow themselves to end up in that position.

[Master Disaster]

1 hour ago, CUDA_Cores said:

we'll what else is new. Another big corporation has been caught doing something it shouldn't have and thanks to their bankroll, will get away with it.

 

Tell me  some real news.

You mustn't be very up with current affairs, Nvidia were forced to refund GTX970 owners for the 3,5GB ram scandal, Microsoft lost in the EU court of their data storage and handling policies & Google were fined billions for pushing their own adverts above others. Valves entire Steam refund service was setup because the EU & Australia sued them over not complying with consumer protection laws. I'd even throw in Audi and the whole "emissions scandal", consumers who bought affected cars were offered a new car and/or some compensation and Audi were fined billions of dollars.

 

In recent times more large corporations have faced the courts and lost than in previous times and the trend looks to continue.

[mr moose]

10 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

A ToS, EULA, CoC or any other "legal agreement, including a legitimate contract btw" cannot supersede the law.

 

At the topic, I'd urge people to wait and see what the courts throw up before passing judgement, not that I'm defending Disney but I would wager the woman is more likely to be ignorant of the law than Disney is.

 

If Disney are found to be breaching the law then by all means, go hell for leather but I somehow doubt they'd allow themselves to end up in that position.

 

Exactly, if the law says it's o.k and the ToS adequately state what they are doing it will get thrown out pretty quick.  However if ToS isn't adequate or the law says otherwise it will go the other way just as quick. 

[Master Disaster]

7 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

Exactly, if the law says it's o.k and the ToS adequately state what they are doing it will get thrown out pretty quick.  However if ToS isn't adequate or the law says otherwise it will go the other way just as quick. 

Yep, if Disney are selling children's data then they are royally fucked because that is straight up illegal everywhere outside of 3rd world nations but as I said previously, Disney have a very large and very expensive legal team and I am damn sure they know exactly how to operate so they are bordering on the line without crossing it.

 

That said I genuinely wouldn't be surprised to find out Disney are selling children's data.

 

Inb4 its the old "well we contracted an external company to handle our data collection and we were not aware that the external 3rd party non Disney contractor was selling data collected from Disney software" excuse.

[sof006]

I'm fairly certain upon install of an app or game the app on Android discloses what access the app has access to and what the app does. I however am not sure what occurs on an iPhone. It might state in the ToS of the game that they collect information. If this information is stated then the parents don't have a leg to stand on as Disney have then already fully disclosed what they are doing.

 

I feel like this will be thrown out of court and Disney will end up winning.

[Master Disaster]

18 minutes ago, sof006 said:

I'm fairly certain upon install of an app or game the app on Android discloses what access the app has access to and what the app does. I however am not sure what occurs on an iPhone. It might state in the ToS of the game that they collect information. If this information is stated then the parents don't have a leg to stand on as Disney have then already fully disclosed what they are doing.

 

I feel like this will be thrown out of court and Disney will end up winning.

Not true at all.

 

I can only speak for the UK as thats where i live and work but here in the UK it is straight up illegal to collect data from children, fullstop. I work in a childcare setting and we can't even store children's details on file without a consent form from the parents. Yep that's right, we have to have a consent form signed by the parent to even be able to keep the child's registration form on file in our filing cabinet, that's a form we have to have by law that was filled in by the parents. We cannot take photos of the children without an express consent form either. Honestly its easier for us to give the children medication than it is to take their photo.

 

Trust me when I say this, here in the UK Disney's EULA could say "we will collect your child's data and sell it on to 3rd parties", worded in that exact way with the obligatory "I Agree" button and it wouldn't make a tiny bit of difference.

 

Just to be super clear though, that only stands for identifiable data, its OK to collect things like usage statistics from your children's app as long as your not collecting anything that can be used to identify the child with.

 

See my above comment, no legal contract can ever supersede the law. Plus thats ignoring the fact the an EULA is not an actual legal contract at all and in most cases is not worth the amount of bytes it takes up on your hard drive.

[mr moose]

42 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Yep, if Disney are selling children's data then they are royally fucked because that is straight up illegal everywhere outside of 3rd world nations but as I said previously, Disney have a very large and very expensive legal team and I am damn sure they know exactly how to operate so they are bordering on the line without crossing it.

 

That said I genuinely wouldn't be surprised to find out Disney are selling children's data.

 

Inb4 its the old "well we contracted an external company to handle our data collection and we were not aware that the external 3rd party non Disney contractor was selling data collected from Disney software" excuse.

I don't know about the US laws, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they only have to put the clause in the ToS that parents agree to.

[Prysin]

This does not surprise me. Ever since ESPN started tanking in revenue, Disney was losing HUGE money. Yes, you may not think so, but ESPN was Disneys real cash cow. It generated substantially more revenue then all other sectors, and when it started to heavily bleed subscribers last year, Disneys revenue plunged. This is why Disney stocks has barely moved up for over a year. The company is scrambling to find a new cash cow, and no, their movies are FAR from a cash cow. CGI effects and actors cost so much that they make very little revenue % wise compared to total expense.

[Jito463]

4 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Interesting, I wouldn't expect this from them.  I get the feeling that they genuinely think there's been a misunderstanding that they can defend against, and not that they knew what they were doing all along and hoping to get away with it, but I guess we'll see.

You have far more faith in them than I do.  WDC isn't the same company that it was under Walt.  When he died, so did his dream.

[vorticalbox]

just installed frozen freefall and other than the windows store permissions there is nothing, not even an "I accept the terms box" you have to open the menu, about, terms and conditions which link http://disneytermsofuse.com.

 

remember I had to go looking for these.

[Ryujin2003]

So.... I'm a parent. My kids had a Kindle with games. But can't install games without permission from my account. Even so, if he had a game that collected data, it would be my data. Why? Because my kid is 7, doesn't have an email address, doesn't have his own Prime membership .. and so on. Any data collected on the device is essentially my data because the tablet is registered to me, tied to my Prime account. I'm not stupid enough to put my child's info on the internet. I ruin his life enough, he can ruin his digital Life when he is older.

 

I'm tired of parents using laziness as an acceptable reason to not learn about the technology their children use. It's crazy. Be educated and be a good parent. This bullshit is what happens when you babysit your children with technology.

 

Any electronic device should be registered to the parent. So it's the parents information being used for advertisements. And as for FTP content... I've said it a thousand times. Nothing is "free" on the internet.

 

Also, did Disney create these games, or give licensing permission to 3rd party companies to create these games?

[AlTech]

1 hour ago, Ryujin2003 said:

Also, did Disney create these games, or give licensing permission to 3rd party companies to create these games?

My understanding is that they published the games but they may not necessarily be the developer of them. It appears that the developers were contractors hired by Disney to make the games Disney wanted.