FTC Acts Against General Motors for Sharing Drivers’ Data

[Kaz]

  Quote

The Federal Trade Commission is taking action against General Motors (GM) and OnStar over allegations they collected, used, and sold drivers’ precise geolocation data and driving behavior information from millions of vehicles—data that can be used to set insurance rates—without adequately notifying consumers and obtaining their affirmative consent.

Under a proposed order settling the FTC’s allegations, General Motors LLC, General Motors Holdings LLC, and OnStar LLC, which are owned by General Motors Company, will be banned for five years from disclosing consumers’ sensitive geolocation and driver behavior data to consumer reporting agencies. They also must take other steps to provide greater transparency and choice to consumers over the collection, use, and disclosure of their connected vehicle data. This is the FTC’s first action related to connected vehicle data.

Expand  

FTC Takes Action Against General Motors for Sharing Drivers’ Precise Location and Driving Behavior Data Without Consent

WWW.FTC.GOV

---

The Federal Trade Commission is taking action against General Motors (GM) and OnStar over allegations they collected, used, and sold drivers’ precise...

 

GM won't be able to sell customer data for 5 years.  Geolocation, driver behaviour and such were collected and sold to insurance companies.  This judgement is a slap on the wrist.  They are still collecting data, they are still going to sell it.  They just have to wait 5 years so the AI companies are large enough they can afford to buy it.  The data shouldn't exist and should be deleted, but they stopped short of that.  GM and every other car company are still going to collect everything they can. 

Edited January 18 by UltraMega

[CoolGTX]

you just have to think that the consumer will end-up being forced to giving consent; because, it will be hidden deep within the "click here if you want to use you vehicle's" OnStar, GPS, Cell phone, maintenance reminder, emergency help ...... hell "owners" will probably be force to agree to "terms" just to make the engine turn on.  Some massive document with all sorts of "requirements"; because there will be no a la cart selection process ....

Oh, you want your $80K vehicle to work - sure, just click Agree, on this binding legal 400 page micro-print document. You can go to DoWeScrewYouAndHow.com to read the terms

Edited January 17 by CoolGTX

[tictoc]

No tracking here.  I'll just be sticking with my 2010 STi, 1978 Bronco, and 1970 F350.

 

No surprise, and I assume all manufacturers are doing this.  VW tracking and data leak - https://x.com/alex_avoigt/status/1873315392082334150 https://www.motor1.com/news/745636/vw-group-location-data-exposed/

 

 

Edited January 17 by tictoc
typo

[Kaz]

All they have to do is lock it behind remote start or heated/cooled seats and cruise control.  People will sign their life away.  Makes me sad.  I'd say that the subscription model for stuff people already own was worse, but that's not true.  Subscription, while despicable, was at least a straightforward transaction.  People don't realize how much their data is worth and how vulnerable it leaves them.  I would love something that showed how much insurance premiums were increased as a result.

[Snakecharmed]

  On 17/01/2025 at 16:10, Kaz said:

People don't realize how much their data is worth and how vulnerable it leaves them.  I would love something that showed how much insurance premiums were increased as a result.

Expand  

Loosely related, I hate how insurance companies nowadays tie an optional tracking device to your auto insurance as a way to pitch savings on your premium. I tried one of those things once and the app that was on my phone was a battery killer. That was the official reason I stopped using it anyway. Either way, never again.

 

The truth is, I'm not okay with being tracked and held hostage to driving in a manner that is more unsafe to my surrounding environment to satisfy the app/tracker's arbitrary definition of safe driving. For me to be a "safe" driver and get the maximum benefit, I would have to always drive at or below the speed limit, accelerate like a centenarian (assuming one would still have the fine motor skills to smoothly regulate the pressure applied through their right leg), and overwhelmingly rely on engine braking. Nobody with any street sense drives like that. If you drive like that, you will get run off the road by other drivers. They claimed my insurance wouldn't ever go up as a result of using the tracker, but I don't believe it, and either way, that data is getting stored on someone else's computer and probably shared with other insurance companies as well.

 

I'm not super adamant about protecting every single piece of my data. It isn't always convenient, and I accept that giving up some of it will happen in modern society, but the insurance tracker was where I decided to draw the line as far as sacrificing my liberty for a monetary benefit. That garbage can only be used against me and screw me when I switch insurance companies, and it isn't worth $100 per 6 months.

 

By extension, I refuse to own a newer car where such data is being collected without my enthusiastic consent. That hasn't made the driving experience better for anyone. There is no benefit to a purchasing consumer for their car to phone home to the manufacturer. This wasn't needed for a century of driving and it isn't needed now.

 

Software-as-a-service was Pandora's box to individual liberties, and who benefits from that? Not you and not other people. It's corporations whose primary objective is to separate you from your money in the most insidious ways possible.