PHOENIX â 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 â even after the users think theyâve told the company to stop.
In what appears to be the first such move in the country, Attorney General Mark Brnovichâs 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 âeven when consumers turn off âlocation servicesâ and take other steps to stop such tracking,â the contract says.
The name of the firm to be investigated is redacted â blacked out by state officials â in the copy of the contract obtained by Capitol Media Services. Under state law, the names of companies under investigation by the Attorney Generalâs Office cannot be released.
But the contract was signed just a week after The Associated Press reported that Google was tracking usersâ locations even after people turned off the âlocation historyâ option on their cell phones and tablets with the Google-created Android operating system.
Brnovich declined to confirm the target is Google.
âI canât say anything other than you donât need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows,â 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 âhelps us provide useful services when people interact with our products, like locally relevant search results.â
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 â an option on a top-level Google menu â will do the trick.
âI 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 theyâre up to, how many hours I spend watching sports or checking scores on my phone, how long I spend at the mall on Sundays,â he said in an interview. âIt really is Big Brother-esque.â
An aide to Brnovich, Ryan Anderson, said itâs even more basic than that. He said users who think theyâre opting out of having their information shared by clicking off âlocation sharingâ are being lied to.
âItâs a fake button,â he said. âIt doesnât actually do anything.â
Providing an actual way to stop tracking â but one thatâs not readily apparent â doesnât mean a company is not deceiving consumers, Anderson said.
âThen why even put âlocation servicesâ up in the first place?â he asked. âIt gives consumers the perception that theyâre actually doing something to protect their privacy when, in fact, theyâre not.â
Brnovich said the default setting should be âoffâ for locating sharing.
âYou should have to opt in as opposed to opting out,â he said.
What gives Brnovich some power over the international company is the stateâs extensive Consumer Fraud Act.
Thatâs 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 âlocation servicesâ that the practice stops.
The invasion of consumer privacy, he said, involves more than just where someone is and has been.
âIf theyâre accessing the contacts of your phone without your permission, that means they are doing things that you either ultimately didnât want done but they did anyway, or alternatively, theyâre collecting information on you without telling you that theyâre doing it,â Brnovich said.
âTheyâre essentially creating a profile on you,â he said. âThey literally can know what you want to buy before you even know.â
It ultimately comes down to who has the right to anyoneâs personal data, Brnovich said.
âQuite 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,â he said. But he said it goes beyond that.
âThe dignity of being a human being is not having everyone know, through some third party, every single thing about what we do,â Brnovich said.
âIâve heard a lot of people say, âWho cares?ââ he continued. âBut if you donât care, then why do people have passwords?â
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.
âTheyâre collecting vast amounts of data, including location services, where youâre at, how long youâre at the store and everything else, which is much more invasive than, letâs say, someone running your credit report,â 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.



