Posts Tagged ‘ Consumer Privacy ’

Is Your Car’s ‘Black Box’ Data Fair Game In An Accident?

July 16th, 2012. By AbiK

Bet you didn’t even realize your car might have a ‘black box’—one of those event data recorders (EDR) that you usually hear in reference to rescue workers mining through some airplane wreckage after a flight’s gone down. Well, while it’s not required by law, if your car has airbags, there’s a very good chance it also has an EDR in it (you can check your owner’s manual to find out, though the NHTSA states 91.6 percent of light vehicles already had them as of 2011).

And, depending on what state you live in, the information that could be recorded on your EDR in the event of a car accident could virtually be fair game for police or insurance companies.

The name ‘EDR’ comes from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) where a car EDR is defined as:

“A function or device installed in a motor vehicle to record technical vehicle and occupant information for a brief period of time (seconds, not minutes) before, during and after a crash for the purpose of monitoring and assessing vehicle safety system performance. For instance, EDRs may record (1) pre-crash vehicle dynamics and system status, (2) driver inputs, (3) vehicle crash signature, (4) restraint usage/deployment status, and (5) post-crash data such as the activation of an automatic collision notification (ACN) system.”

While a lot of folks refer to the EDR as the more  commonly heard ‘black box’ from airplanes, trains and ships—there is a difference.  A black box data recorder records information continuously during the entire time the airplane or train is in operation. By contrast, a car’s EDR only records the brief period of time just before an accident would occur.

So speaking of a possible car crash, who exactly has access to that EDR data if you should have a car accident? Currently, 13 states have privacy laws in place that protect EDR data. However, according to the NHTSA, “Courts can subpoena EDR data through court orders, and some States collect data under their existing State laws governing crash investigations. Some insurance policies may have contract terms related to data collection from EDRs.”

And EDR data has been used in some court cases as evidence.

But car accident lawyer Rex Parris, of R. Rex Parris Law Firm in Lancaster, CA doesn’t think EDR’s are a bad thing. Parris, who’s also the mayor of Lancaster, CA, was recently interviewed by KTVU Channel 2 News on the subject. According to the KTVU interview, Parris says, “It gives us a lot of information that would shorten trials, and—in many, many cases—remove the necessity of a trial.”

“It has the effect of keeping people honest,” said Parris. ” You know, you’re not gonna lie about your speed. You’re not gonna lie about what happened, because there’s evidence saying what happened.”

California, the state in which Parris practices law, is one of the 13 states with laws protecting EDR data privacy. California law prohibits any download of that data without the owner’s permission or a court order. Aside from California, the other states with such privacy laws are: Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, North Dakota, New Hampshire, Nevada, Oregon, Texas, Virginia and Washington.

But state laws vary and there is currently no standard for car manufacturers regarding which event data the EDRs should record. As such, there is a bill winding its way through Congress right now—Senate Bill 1813 (Section 31406)—aka MAP-21—that seeks to not only mandate installation of EDRs in all new cars starting in 2015, but also standardize which events the EDRs can capture. The bill already passed the Senate in March.

In terms of data privacy, should the bill go through, it specifies that the vehicle’s owner would have access to the data on collected on it—here are the Limitations on Information Retrieval from the bill:

(1) OWNERSHIP OF DATA- Any data in an event data recorder required under part 563 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, regardless of when the passenger motor vehicle in which it is installed was manufactured, is the property of the owner, or in the case of a leased vehicle, the lessee of the passenger motor vehicle in which the data recorder is installed.

(2) PRIVACY- Data recorded or transmitted by such a data recorder may not be retrieved by a person other than the owner or lessee of the motor vehicle in which the recorder is installed unless–

(A) a court authorizes retrieval of the information in furtherance of a legal proceeding;

(B) the owner or lessee consents to the retrieval of the information for any purpose, including the purpose of diagnosing, servicing, or repairing the motor vehicle;

(C) the information is retrieved pursuant to an investigation or inspection authorized under section 1131(a) or 30166 of title 49, United States Code, and the personally identifiable information of the owner, lessee, or driver of the vehicle and the vehicle identification number is not disclosed in connection with the retrieved information; or

(D) the information is retrieved for the purpose of determining the need for, or facilitating, emergency medical response in response to a motor vehicle crash.

The bill, however, still needs to get through the House. So stay tuned.

 

Tags: Car Accident, Car Accident Fault, Consumer Privacy, EDR, Event Data Recorder, Insurance Company, KTVU Channel 2, R Rex Parris Law Firm
Posted in Automotive, Lawyers | No Comments »

TMI: California Zip Codes a No-No at the Check-out

February 16th, 2011. By AbiK

Can I have your zip code?

Can I have your phone number?

Can I see your card for the secure code?

It’s the barrage of questions you get at whatever check-out you happen to be at when you’re paying by credit card—or even debit card. You’re never quite sure if it’s really as a “protection” for you, the consumer, against possible credit card fraud, or whether it’s just some ploy to grab more data about you, the potential repeat purchaser whose personal info will help “Marketing” map out its next advertising plan (“Let’s do a mailer!”) and sales forecast.

While we all appreciate some safeguards against credit card theft, some retailers use such info either for their own marketing purposes, or to sell the info to third party marketers or businesses who then use it themselves. What do you get out of it? A catalog in the mail. A discount coupon from a company you’ve never done business with. That sort of thing. The end of the world? No. But it does beg the question of why someone is soliciting you without your approval to do so. And why should they be tracking where you shop and where you live? Isn’t that a privacy issue?

It’s certainly a Song-Beverly Act issue.

You could just wear the above t-shirt from zazzle.com every time you shop—but if you live in California, it’s your lucky day as cnn.com reports that the California State Supreme Court has unanimously voted that retailers do not have the right to ask for cardholders’ zip codes—it violates their right to protect their personal information; and asking for a zip code can now lead to a fine.

So from now on—and it only applies to retailers in CA—Californians shouldn’t be asked for their zip code numbers when buying something with a credit card. What’s interesting though, is it isn’t really just the practice of the retailer seeing (or hearing) your personal information. At issue is the fact that they record that information—that is, they punch it into the register keypad.

So, for security purposes, a cashier could just as easily ask to see a driver’s license or other form of identification, and of course, he or she would see exactly where you live (and perhaps your height and eye color, too). But, should that cashier go to punch in any of that information…uh-uh-uh…then they’re stepping over the line. Recording the information clearly shows intent to not only verify you as the cardholder, but to also then use that info for some other future purpose.

Making a purchase online or want that in-store purchase delivered? That’s still not a problem and not impacted by this latest ruling. If you really don’t want a retailer to have a record of where you live, take whatever you bought home yourself, and heck, pay cash. And certainly don’t shop online where everything from your IP address to your credit card info and email (“we’ll send you an email confirmation”) are recorded, and used.

This ruling by the CA Supreme Court overrules an earlier Court of Appeals decision, and, as the cnn.com article states, stems back to a 1971 state law “that prohibits businesses from asking credit cardholders for “personal identification information” that could be used to track them down.”

Tags: California Supreme Court, Consumer Privacy, Credit Card, Credit Card Fraud, Song-Beverly-Act-Class-Actions, Zip Code
Posted in Consumer Fraud, Emerging Issues | 1 Comment »