PHOENIX β The state attorney general has launched an inquiry into whether a major tech firm is violating the rights of Arizona residents by tracking their movements and activities through their cellphones β even after the users think theyβve told the company to stop.
In what appears to be the first such move in the country, Attorney General Mark Brnovichβs office has awarded a contract to a Washington, D.C., law firm to investigate.
The probe will be into how this company stores consumer location data through smartphone operating systems βeven when consumers turn off βlocation servicesβ and take other steps to stop such tracking,β the contract says.
The name of the firm to be investigated is redacted β blacked out by state officials β in the copy of the contract obtained by Capitol Media Services. Under state law, the names of companies under investigation by the Attorney Generalβs Office cannot be released.
But the contract was signed just a week after The Associated Press reported that Google was tracking usersβ locations even after people turned off the βlocation historyβ option on their cell phones and tablets with the Google-created Android operating system.
Brnovich declined to confirm the target is Google.
βI canβt say anything other than you donβt need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows,β he said, quoting a line from a Bob Dylan song.
A Google spokesman would not comment on the inquiry, saying only that the information the company gathers βhelps us provide useful services when people interact with our products, like locally relevant search results.β
He also said there are ways for users to delete location history and web activity.
But Brnovich said that process is opaque to users who think that turning off their location history β an option on a top-level Google menu β will do the trick.
βI should not be a tech expert in order to figure out how not to have a third party know everything about my private life, including my emails, my conversations with my wife, my kids, what theyβre up to, how many hours I spend watching sports or checking scores on my phone, how long I spend at the mall on Sundays,β he said in an interview. βIt really is Big Brother-esque.β
An aide to Brnovich, Ryan Anderson, said itβs even more basic than that. He said users who think theyβre opting out of having their information shared by clicking off βlocation sharingβ are being lied to.
βItβs a fake button,β he said. βIt doesnβt actually do anything.β
Providing an actual way to stop tracking β but one thatβs not readily apparent β doesnβt mean a company is not deceiving consumers, Anderson said.
βThen why even put βlocation servicesβ up in the first place?β he asked. βIt gives consumers the perception that theyβre actually doing something to protect their privacy when, in fact, theyβre not.β
Brnovich said the default setting should be βoffβ for locating sharing.
βYou should have to opt in as opposed to opting out,β he said.
What gives Brnovich some power over the international company is the stateβs extensive Consumer Fraud Act.
Thatβs the same law he used to get refunds for Arizonans who purchased what they thought were clean-burning diesel-powered vehicles from Volkswagen. Brnovich got a court to rule that the allegations of misleading Arizonans were enough to give him jurisdiction over that multinational firm.
In the current case, he said, the company in question is making untrue representations to Arizona consumers that once they turn off βlocation servicesβ that the practice stops.
The invasion of consumer privacy, he said, involves more than just where someone is and has been.
βIf theyβre accessing the contacts of your phone without your permission, that means they are doing things that you either ultimately didnβt want done but they did anyway, or alternatively, theyβre collecting information on you without telling you that theyβre doing it,β Brnovich said.
βTheyβre essentially creating a profile on you,β he said. βThey literally can know what you want to buy before you even know.β
It ultimately comes down to who has the right to anyoneβs personal data, Brnovich said.
βQuite frankly, I do think as a human being I have a property right in my information, my data, things about me, who I deal with, where I go,β he said. But he said it goes beyond that.
βThe dignity of being a human being is not having everyone know, through some third party, every single thing about what we do,β Brnovich said.
βIβve heard a lot of people say, βWho cares?ββ he continued. βBut if you donβt care, then why do people have passwords?β
Brnovich acknowledged that others gather information about Arizona consumers without their consent and sell it to third parties, particularly credit bureaus. But he said this is far different.
βTheyβre collecting vast amounts of data, including location services, where youβre at, how long youβre at the store and everything else, which is much more invasive than, letβs say, someone running your credit report,β he said.
Brnovich noted that consumers have a right to request a copy of their credit report to find out exactly what is being reported on them and ask the company to remove erroneous information. That is not an option, he said, with the kind of tracking being done here.
While Congress and federal authorities have raised questions about tracking, there is no evidence that any have pursued investigations or litigation to stop the practice.
