So, Apple are trying to do for books what they’ve already done for music. That is, to ensure that you buy their books, on their hardware. An anti-Apple / anti-iPad rant? Join the queue you say… but this isn’t about Apple-bashing… They simply serve as a timely reminder about a common scenario.
No, this is going to turn into a privacy rant. I’m seriously beginning to believe that we, as web consumers are giving away far too much in the way of privacy. I’m not talking about rogue facebook apps that let my boss see that my sick day was actually a surf day, but something altogether more far-reaching.
I’d like you to imagine a world where Steve Jobs is retired, and Apple goes to seed (like it did before) and is on the brink of collapse. We all know from recent experience how quickly ‘profitable’ and ‘successful’ companies can go under. In this world, let’s say Apple gets taken over by GloboCom Industries – owned and run by a man with some very specific political leanings. People are grateful – their DRM-crippled music is still playable – their vendor specific eBooks are still readable.
So far so good. Except that suddenly, after my latest iPad/pod/phone update, my subscriptions are cancelled. Worse than that – content I’ve already paid for is unusable. I can’t seem to access my subscription to the Guardian, or my medical reference book on abortion. Perhaps my subscription to Guns’n'ammo won’t open without nannying warnings about gun control. Maybe my copy of TopGear magazine keeps flashing a green warning.
OK – so far – just frustrating. Possibly a feeling that you’ve been robbed, but, maybe you didn’t care that much about the back issues of the Nursing Times, or New Scientist. Perhaps your faith in your backup (printed) copies of the watchtower are enough to allay your fears of not being able to go back and read those inspirational articles once again.
Then comes the ‘Event’. The shooting; the innoculation scare; the paedo priest; the glacial meltdown; war / famine / disaster… A distinct group is singled out for media vitriol – Bankers, scientists, fundamentalists, mentalists, the left, the right, the poor or the rich… Under pressure from the media (also owned by GloboCom Inc) – masked as ‘public opinion’ – the government passes a bill to ‘watch’ those people, to ‘manage’ their exposure to society, to ‘outlaw’ that kind of thing…
This is the point at which you should be really worried that you let Apple know exactly what books you read, and where you bank, and where you live, and your email address. Next thing you know, there are reporters at your door from GloboCom News, or one of their subsidiaries. You’re plastered across front pages, with a hundred of your peers. The public are baying for your blood. The government offers / forces you to go to a ‘safe’ country. If you’d just be good enough to don this orange jumpsuit, and get on this plane… all for your protection of course.
So what?
I propose a system of trust. Apple don’t need to know what media I consume. I appreciate that good data is useful for recommending more stuff that i might buy – that’s fair enough – but do they need to know that my identity as ‘user 147340′ is actually Joe Bloggs, of blah-blah road, blah-city, UK? No, of course not. I simply identify myself to them as ‘user 147340′ when I log in (preferably not using my email address as a user ID) and they say ‘hey 147340 – we have some great new tunes for ya!’.
I’d like to see a privacy license, perhaps on the lines of the creative commons idea. Where the principles of the license are simple to understand, and clear for anyone, with human, computer and lawyer – friendly texts. Amongst other things they should outline:
1. Exactly what details are stored – specifically calling out personal data such as name, address, DOB, email.
2. What happens to your details when:
a) Company is taken over
b) Company goes into administration, or goes bankrupt.
3. A clear ‘exit strategy’ (what happens when you close your account) – specifying:
a) What happens to your stored details
b) what happens to DRM – controlled content that you might ‘own’
4. Who has access to your details – not just generic descriptions of ’3rd parties’ – but actually where you can see a log of when and where your data is sold (assuming you’ve given them permission to do just that).
With regard to number 3 – I once heard of a company online (sorry, can’t remember who), that when you delete your account they send you an XML file (or something similar) with all your details in. Why? So that you could, at any time, restore your account with the very same details – potentially re-enabling DRM’d content, or simply keeping all your same settings. To me this sounds like a good step towards better trust online.
My younger friends tell me that privacy is an outmoded idea. That living your life in public is all part of the facebook generation way. Maybe it is – but I don’t see that encouraging a little trust wouldn’t be a good idea… trust me, orange really isn’t my colour.
Further reading
Little Brother – Cory Doctorow
OpenID
Privacy International
Update!
I’m not the only one that thinks privacy issues are ripe for investigation – Mozilla foundation obviously has similar concerns!
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-389340.html
yellowdingo on Dec 1, 2009 wrote:
