Consumer Rights Wiki - User contributions [en]

Google Pixel 6a Battery Performance Program

2026-03-04T18:21:06Z

JP: Fixed a typo (you -> your)

{{Stub}}
{{Incomplete|Issue 1=Implimentation of "Media sources" section to references|Issue 2=Merging from [[Pixel 6a Battery Nerf]]}}
{{IncidentCargo
|Company=Google
|StartDate=2025-07-02
|EndDate=
|Status=Active
|ProductLine=
|Product=Pixel 6a
|ArticleType=Product
|Type=Forced Migration
|Description=
}}
The Google Pixel 6a is an Android smartphone designed, developed and marketed by [[Google]]. It was released on July 28, 2022. Android 16 is expected to be the last version supported with security updates expected to end sometime in 2027.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Pixel 6a end of life date |url=https://endoflife.date/pixel |url-status=live |access-date=2025-07-03 |website=endoflife.date |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20260118201513/https://endoflife.date/pixel |archive-date=18 Jan 2026}}</ref> On July 2, 2025, Google announced its Pixel 6a Battery Performance Program to users:

[[File:Google pixel 6a email.png|thumb|right|Email sent to users with a Pixel 6a.]]
<blockquote>"Google has determined that certain Pixel 6a phones (“Impacted Devices”) require a mandatory software update to reduce the risk of potential battery overheating which could pose a risk to users. The update will enable important battery management features that will reduce battery capacity and charging performance on Impacted Devices after the battery reaches 400 charge cycles.

All Pixel 6a devices will receive a mandatory automatic software update to Android 16, with roll out starting July 8 2025, but only Impacted Devices will receive the battery management features. Some users will see changes sooner than others, because the battery management features activate only after an Impacted Device reaches 400 charge cycles.

We want our customers to have the best possible experience with their products, so users of these Impacted Devices are eligible for support options from Google based upon country of purchase, location, and warranty status, subject to our terms and conditions below. Not all Pixel 6a devices are impacted by the reduction in battery capacity and charging performance. If your device is not impacted, your battery management features will remain the same as before, and you will not be eligible for these support options under this program."''<ref name=":0">[https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/16340779? https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/16340779]

Mirror, via the Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20250703210308/https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/16340779
</ref>''

Google pixel needs certain battery replacements for 2025</blockquote>

==Compensation==

===Request form sent out to users===
Google has asked users to provide the IMEI (International Mobile Equipment Identity) number of their Pixel 6a to determine whether their device is an "Impacted Device."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Request a repair, payment, or future discount code |url=https://support.google.com/pixelphone/workflow/16310202 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250703211550/https://support.google.com/pixelphone/workflow/16310202 |archive-date=2025-07-03 |access-date=2025-07-03}}</ref> If the user's device is an "Impacted Device," they may choose one of the following:

*'''Free battery replacement''' (only available in: United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Germany, Singapore, and India)
*'''$150 USD''' (or local equivalent) '''discount code applicable towards the purchase of another Pixel phone''' on the Google Store (unavailable in certain countries)
*'''$100 USD''' (or local equivalent)

Compensation

===Payment-processing issues===
The $100 USD compensation option requires users to process payment through [[wikipedia:Payoneer|Payoneer]], which has many issues:

*Users must provide sensitive personal information including Social Security numbers and bank details
*A $3 USD processing fee is deducted from the compensation
*An annual account fee of $29.95 USD is charged if the account balance does not exceed $2,000 USD in transactions within 12 months<nowiki><ref></nowiki>{{Cite web |title=Annual account fee |url=https://payoneer.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/43738/~/annual-account-fee |url-status=live |access-date=25 Mar 2025 |website=[[Payoneer]] |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20251129174745/https://payoneer.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/43738/~/annual-account-fee |archive-date=29 Nov 2025}}<nowiki></ref></nowiki> https://support.google.com/pixelphone/workflow/16310202
*Users report being advised to immediately delete their Payoneer account after receiving compensation to avoid fees<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |title=I have replaced battery in a local shop not supported by Google |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/Pixel4a/comments/1i1e4ds/i_have_replaced_battery_in_a_local_shop_not/ |url-status=live |access-date=25 Mar 2025 |website=[[Reddit]]}}</ref>

===Store-credit limitations===
[[File:6a-compensation-screenshot-Determine if your device qualifies for the Pixel 6a Battery Performance Program.png|alt=Screenshot of Google's Compensation Options for the Pixel 6a Battery Performance Program|thumb|Screenshot of Google's Compensation Options for the Pixel 6a Battery Performance Program]]
Placeholder

===Reimbursement===
There is an option if you have had your 6a battery replaced at an authorized service center prior to the program announcement.
[[File:6a-battery-previously-replaced-screenshot-Determine if your device qualifies for the Pixel 6a Battery Performance ProgramScreenshot 2025-07-03 at 15-49-06 Determine if your device qualifies for the Pixel 6a Battery Performance Program.png|alt=Have you recently had your battery repaired at an authorized repair partner|thumb|Have you recently had your battery repaired at an authorized repair partner]]

==Aftermath of software update==
After the update, users experience a battery cap of 80%, a message in the settings app's batttery section, Placeholder

===Battery-performance issues===
Users have reported several issues following the update: Including inability to charge<ref>{{Cite web |date=19 Jul 2025 |title=My pixel 6a doesn't charge - at all - after update |url=https://old.reddit.com/r/pixel_phones/comments/1m42zn3/my_pixel_6a_doesnt_charge_at_all_after_update/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250721024418/https://old.reddit.com/r/pixel_phones/comments/1m42zn3/my_pixel_6a_doesnt_charge_at_all_after_update/ |archive-date=21 Jul 2025 |access-date=21 Jul 2025 |website=[[Reddit]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=18 Jul 2025 |title=Will it charge? |url=https://old.reddit.com/r/Pixel6/comments/1m2xtlt/will_it_charge/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250721024834/https://old.reddit.com/r/Pixel6/comments/1m2xtlt/will_it_charge/ |archive-date=21 Jul 2025 |access-date=21 Jul 2025 |website=[[Reddit]]}}</ref>.
Placeholder

===Safety issue===
A Pixel 6a caught fire after the update, indicating the Battery Performance Program isn't enough to prevent overheating<ref>{{Cite web |last=Whitwam |first=Ryan |date=29 Jul 2025 |title=Another Google Pixel 6a catches fire after battery-nerfing update |url=https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/07/another-google-pixel-6a-catches-fire-after-battery-nerfing-update/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250729114215/https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/07/another-google-pixel-6a-catches-fire-after-battery-nerfing-update/ |archive-date=29 Jul 2025 |website=Arstechnica}}</ref>.

===Battery-replacement complications===
Placeholder

===Technical evidence of battery changes===
The battery voltage has been dropped to below 4.0V after the update, the actual capacity has been reduced to below 60%<ref>{{Cite web |date=10 Jul 2025 |title=Thank you Google for Fast Charging Update /s |url=https://old.reddit.com/r/Pixel6aUsers/comments/1lwf3p5/thank_you_google_for_fast_charging_update_s/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250721025129/https://old.reddit.com/r/Pixel6aUsers/comments/1lwf3p5/thank_you_google_for_fast_charging_update_s/|archive-date=2025-07-21 |access-date=2025-07-20 |website=[[Reddit]]}}</ref>.

==Possible technical rationale==
While Google has not provided detailed technical explanations for the update, there are several known factors about lithium-ion battery aging that could potentially justify such measures:

===Aging lithium-ion batteries===
Lithium-ion batteries face degradation as they age:
*Loss of active lithium ions through repeated charge cycles
*Growth of the Solid Electrolyte Interphase (SEI) layer
*Physical expansion & contraction stress during charging cycles
*Potential for dendrite formation in aged cells
*Increased internal resistance over time<ref>{{Cite web |last=Chu |first=Tien-Fu |last2=Rajendran |first2=Raja |last3=Kuznetsova |first3=Iren |last4=Wang |first4=Gou-Jen |date=31 Mar 2020 |title=High-power, non-enzymatic glucose biofuel cell based on a nano/micro hybrid-structured Au anode |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378775320301476 |url-status=live |access-date=22 Mar 2025 |website=ScienceDirect}}</ref>

===Safety considerations===
Several factors specific to the Pixel 6a situation could indicate that this was a battery safety concern:
*The device was released in July 2022; many units are approaching 3 years of use
*The mandatory nature of the update suggests safety implications rather than performance optimization
*There have been reports of the device spontaneously catching on fire
===Precedent in mobile phones===
Similar battery-related interventions have occurred previously; Google's own Pixel 4a in January of 2025 and Apple's 2017 iPhone throttling was done to prevent unexpected shutdowns in devices with degraded batteries.

===Potential manufacturing variables===
Several factors could explain why only certain devices are affected:
*Different battery suppliers or manufacturing batches
*Variations in battery cell chemistry or construction
*Manufacturing date ranges coinciding with specific material supplies
*Quality control variations between production runs

==Media Articles==
https://9to5google.com/2025/07/02/pixel-6a-battery-update-details/

https://www.androidauthority.com/pixel-6a-battery-limit-3573411/

https://www.theverge.com/news/697103/google-android16-update-pixel-6a-battery-overheating-fix-july-8

https://9to5google.com/2025/07/02/google-removes-pixel-6a-factory-images/

https://www.techradar.com/phones/google-pixel-phones/the-pixel-6a-will-get-a-mandatory-update-that-will-reduce-battery-capacity-soon-and-other-pixel-phones-could-be-next

==Criticism by community==

#This update is an automatic update '''users can not opt''' '''out''' of.
#Despite claim, this update '''does not prevent''' the phone from overheating or catching fire, as shown by this user whose Pixel 6a that got the July update, caught fire while charging overnight<ref>{{Cite web |last=Whitwam |first=Ryan |date=29 Jul 2025 |title=Another Google Pixel 6a catches fire after battery-nerfing update |url=https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/07/another-google-pixel-6a-catches-fire-after-battery-nerfing-update/?comments-page=1#comments |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250728172217/https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/07/another-google-pixel-6a-catches-fire-after-battery-nerfing-update/ |archive-date=2025-07-28 |access-date=4 Aug 2025 |website=Ars Technica}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=27 Jul 2025 |title=I'm the 3rd one posting this for this month. Pixel 6a caught on fire right next to me on the nightstand. |url=https://old.reddit.com/r/GooglePixel/comments/1ma6hpa/im_the_3rd_one_posting_this_for_this_month_pixel/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250728055102/https://old.reddit.com/r/GooglePixel/comments/1ma6hpa/im_the_3rd_one_posting_this_for_this_month_pixel/ |archive-date=2025-07-28 |access-date=28 Jul 2025 |website=[[Reddit]]}}</ref>.

==Restoring battery functionality==

===Replacing the battery===
Placeholder

Google has removed all official images for the pixel 6a released prior to the date of this program's inception.

===Rolling-back Android===
By editing android-info.txt file, Users are able to bypass the anti-rollback bootloader update and successfully downgrade Android 14 from Android 16<ref>{{Cite web |date=19 Jul 2025 |title=Hey guys! I just rollback to android14 success! |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/hey-guys-i-just-rollback-to-android14-success.4750539/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250721022623/https://xdaforums.com/t/hey-guys-i-just-rollback-to-android14-success.4750539/ |archive-date=21 Jul 2025 |access-date=21 Jul 2025 |website=XDA Developers}}</ref>.

==References==
<references />

[[Category:Incidents]]
[[Category:Google Pixel 6a]]

Google Play Integrity API

2025-10-17T03:55:13Z

JP: Changed GrapheneOS link to Wikipedia article

The Play Integrity API is an API provided by [[Google]] for the [[Android]] Operating System that allows applications to verify the genuineness of the app's binary and Android version.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Overview of the Play Integrity API |url=https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/overview |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250607124755/https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/overview |archive-date=2025-06-07 |access-date=2025-06-10 |website=Android Developers}}</ref> It is the successor of the now deprecated SafetyNet Attestation API.<ref>{{Cite web |title=About the SafetyNet Attestation API deprecation |url=https://developer.android.com/privacy-and-security/safetynet/deprecation-timeline |website=Android Developers}}</ref> The API offers 4 device integrity labels, which are detailed in the table below.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Integrity verdicts |url=https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/verdicts#device-integrity-field |website=Android Developers}}</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Integrity Level
!Bootloader Can Be Unlocked
!Customized OSes Allowed
!Description
!Requirement(s)
|-
|<code>MEETS_BASIC_INTEGRITY</code>
|{{Yes}}
|{{Yes}}
|The app is running on a device that passes basic system integrity checks. The device may not be Play Protect certified.
|Attestation root of trust provided by Google
|-
|<code>MEETS_VIRTUAL_INTEGRITY</code>
| style="vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;" |Unknown
| style="vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;" |Unknown
|The app is running on an Android-powered emulator with Google Play services.
|The emulator passes system integrity checks and meets core Android compatibility requirements.
|-
|<code>MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY</code>
|{{No}}
|{{No}}
|The app is running on a genuine Play Protect certified Android-powered device.
|Hardware-backed proof that the device bootloader is locked and the loaded Android OS is a certified device manufacturer image.
|-
|<code>MEETS_STRONG_INTEGRITY</code>
|{{No}}
|{{No}}
|The app is running on a genuine Play Protect certified Android-powered device with a recent security update.
|Android 13+: <code>MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY</code> and security updates in the last year for all partitions of the device, including an Android OS partition patch and a vendor partition patch.
Android 12 and lower: Only hardware-backed proof of boot integrity
|}

==Consumer impact summary==
Since the Play Integrity API relies on Google to certify devices, any apps requiring <code>MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY</code> or <code>MEETS_STRONG_INTEGRITY</code> are only allowed on operating systems that Google allows. This allows Google to exert [[Monopoly|monopolistic]] power by not certifying competitors' operating systems, since many apps choose to use the Play Integrity API instead of the Key Attestation API that is built into Android.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Apps & Games need PI |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/4677050/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Verify hardware-backed key pairs with key attestation |url=https://developer.android.com/privacy-and-security/security-key-attestation |website=Android Developers}}</ref>

Notable examples of apps requiring Google-certified operating systems:

*Google Wallet
*VPN by Google
*Netflix
*McDonald's
*Uber Driver
*Twitter/X
*Twilio Authy Authenticator
*ChatGPT<ref>{{Cite web |title=PlayIntegrity Verification failed - ChatGPT / Bugs |url=https://community.openai.com/t/1267945 |website=OpenAI Developer Community}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Question - ChatGPT error: Preauth Playintegrity verification failed |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/4737618/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref>

This has led to users being unable to use apps on privacy-focused forks of Android, like [[wikipedia:GrapheneOS|GrapheneOS]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Wallet - Google Pay |url=https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/475/ |website=GrapheneOS Discussion Forum}}</ref>

==See also==
[https://mayrhofer.eu.org/courses/android-security/selected-paper/2024/Comparing_key_attestation_and_Play_Integrity_API.pdf Android System Integrity: Comparing Key Attestation and the Play Integrity API]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Android]]
[[Category:Google Play Store]]

StarForce Technologies

2025-08-17T03:07:30Z

JP: Added stub notice

{{StubNotice}}{{CompanyCargo
|Founded=2000-09
|Industry=Software
|Logo=Starforce logo.png
|Type=Private
|Website=https://www.star-force.com/,https://www.star-force.ru/
|Description=StarForce Technologies develops copy protection and digital rights management (DRM) software for games and applications.
}}
{{Ph-C-Int}}

==Consumer-impact summary==
{{Ph-C-CIS}}

==Incidents==
{{Ph-C-Inc}}

This is a list of all consumer-protection incidents this company is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|{{PAGENAME}} category]].
===Example incident one (''date'')===
{{Main|link to the main article}}
Short summary of the incident (could be the same as the summary preceding the article).
===Example incident two (''date'')===
...

==Products==
{{Ph-C-P}}

==See also==
{{Ph-C-SA}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]]

Forced User Agreement on Jetbrains IntelliJ software

2025-08-01T13:46:58Z

JP: Add another potential workaround

{{Stub}}

{{ProductLineCargo
|Company=Jetbrains
|ReleaseYear=2024
|InProduction=Yes
|ArticleType=Product
|Category=Software
|Website=https://www.jetbrains.com/
|Description=Jetbrains Developer Tools is a set of IDEs designed for major programming languages.
}}Forced User Agreement on Jetbrains IntelliJ software is an attempt to alter past fallback licenses. In 2025 company is trying to enforce new terms on software bought in 2024 or prior.<blockquote>'''What is the perpetual fallback license?'''

The perpetual fallback license is a part of JetBrains' subscription system. It allows you to use a particular software version indefinitely, even if your active subscription ends. However, to upgrade to a newer version, you’ll need to buy or renew your subscription.</blockquote>

==Incidents==
This is a list of all consumer protection incidents related to this product line. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{PAGENAME}}|{{PAGENAME}} category]].

{{Placeholder box|Users who bought Jetbrains software prior to 2025 and decided to discontinue subscription are getting popups with "Jetbrains User Agreement 2.0". You can only accept of exit the software. The workaround it to remove `~/.local/share/JetBrains` which gives few days of rest. A more permanent workaround may be to make the directory inaccessible to the Jetbrains processes (e.g. using chmod and chown). }}
[[File:Screenshot at 2025-07-24 11-25-46.png|thumb|In year 2025 WebStorm 2024.1.7 is connecting to Jetbrains servers and showing new terms. Jetbrains does not allow you to say no and stay under old terms.]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

Slashdot websites require TOS acceptance without consent

2025-07-01T21:18:17Z

JP: Add stub notice

{{StubNotice}}

Sourceforge.net, a common place for developers to share their code, forces their users to unconditionally accept new terms and conditions without any other alternative. The only button to press is "I agree".{{Citation needed}} There is no way to refuse the new terms and conditions. There is also no way for a user to delete their account without accepting the new conditions.{{Citation needed}} A link to those terms and conditions is available and shows content that amounts to an equivalent of 54 pages in format A4.

==Background==
==Incident==
Denying users to disagree or refuse terms and conditions may be illegal in Europe, according to GDPR. The company has been contacted. The incident will be updated accordingly once their response has been received.

===Company's response===

SourceForge.net's has yet to respond to inquires.

==Consumer response==

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{Placeholder box|[[mw:Help:VisualEditor/User_guide#Editing_categories|Add a category]] with the same name as the product, service, website, software, product line or company that this article is about.

The "Incidents" category is not needed.}}

Slashdot websites require TOS acceptance without consent

2025-07-01T21:13:09Z

JP: Clean up formatting, add cit. needed notices.

Sourceforge.net, a common place for developers to share their code, forces their users to unconditionally accept new terms and conditions without any other alternative. The only button to press is "I agree".{{Citation needed}} There is no way to refuse the new terms and conditions. There is also no way for a user to delete their account without accepting the new conditions.{{Citation needed}} A link to those terms and conditions is available and shows content that amounts to an equivalent of 54 pages in format A4.

==Background==
==Incident==
Denying users to disagree or refuse terms and conditions may be illegal in Europe, according to GDPR. The company has been contacted. The incident will be updated accordingly once their response has been received.

===Company's response===

SourceForge.net's has yet to respond to inquires.

==Consumer response==

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{Placeholder box|[[mw:Help:VisualEditor/User_guide#Editing_categories|Add a category]] with the same name as the product, service, website, software, product line or company that this article is about.

The "Incidents" category is not needed.}}

Life360

2025-06-25T00:05:23Z

JP: Added "Citation needed" notes

{{InfoboxCompany
| Name = {{PAGENAME}}
| Type =Private
| Founded =April 17, 2007
| Industry =Social Networking
| Official Website =https://www.life360.com/
| Logo =Life360 Horizontal.png
}}'''Life360 is a''' location-based social networking application developed by Life360, Inc., a San Mateo, California–based technology company. Designed primarily for families, the app enables users to share real-time locations, communicate through group messaging, receive alerts about members’ movements, and access emergency services. Since its launch in 2008, Life360 has evolved into a comprehensive safety and coordination platform with millions of active users worldwide.{{Citation needed}} Its emphasis on private circles and family-focused features distinguishes it from other location-sharing tools, making it a widely used app for digital family life management.
==Consumer-impact summary==
'''User Freedom'''

Life360 has been criticized for enabling overbearing surveillance, particularly of teenagers and young adults.{{Citation needed}} Critics argue that the app can be misused by parents or guardians to exercise excessive control, limiting users’ autonomy and contributing to anxiety or strained relationships.{{Citation needed}} While the company has attempted to address this with features like ''Bubbles'', which allow for temporary location obfuscation, some view these efforts as insufficient or superficial.{{Citation needed}}

'''User Privacy'''

Serious privacy concerns have emerged around Life360’s handling of location data. Investigations revealed that the company previously sold precise user location data to third-party data brokers, raising ethical and legal questions about consent and transparency.{{Citation needed}} Though Life360 claimed the data was anonymized and later announced it would cease this practice, skepticism remains about the extent to which user information is protected.{{Citation needed}}

'''Business Model'''

Life360 operates on a freemium model, offering basic services for free while monetizing premium features and until recently, user data. Critics argue this incentivized data exploitation, as revenue generation relied not only on subscriptions but also on selling behavioral and location-based data. The tension between maximizing profit and protecting user rights has led to public backlash and regulatory scrutiny.{{Citation needed}}

'''Market Control'''

Through its 2021 acquisition of Tile, a major competitor in the tracking device space, Life360 expanded its presence in the location services market.{{Citation needed}} This consolidation raised concerns about reduced competition and increased centralization of user data. With fewer independent alternatives available, users may find it difficult to opt out of the ecosystem without losing access to widely used tracking features, effectively tightening Life360’s control over the market.

==Incidents==

===Sale of Data to Arity and Allstate (2016)===
{{Main|Allstate and Arity's alleged unauthorized driver data collection through mobile apps}}
Life360 collected and sold data to Arity, a subsidiary of Allstate, which allegedly broke the Texas Data Privacy and Security Act in its later use to increase car insurance premiums

==See also==

*[[Data brokers]]

==References==
<references />
[[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]]

Software locks

2025-06-21T17:10:18Z

JP: Improve summary

{{StubNotice}}

Software locks are security measures used to control access and features in consumer electronic hardware and software. <ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lock_(computer_science)</ref><ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open-source_and_closed-source_software</ref> Software locks are not considered bad practice and are necessary for basic cybersecurity and operation of most hardware, though they can be abused.

==Noteworthy bad practice examples==

===Anti Interoperability===
Also see: [[wikipedia:Proprietary_protoco|Proprietary protocols]], [[Anti Interoperability]], [[Hardware Anti Interoperability]]<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_hardware? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_hardware?]</ref>
wip stub example you can't use our competitors Bluetooth headset with our XYZ operating system because we invented a our own new proprietary XYZ Bluetooth audio codec and that product doesn't support it.

real example apple mfi certifications on charging and data transfer accessories

apple's history of anti-Interoperability

===Account-required products===

=====Mobile phones=====
[https://pirg.org/articles/refurbishers-repairers-and-recyclers-call-on-the-fcc-to-stop-phone-software-locks/ ref] Small preamble focused on how mobile phones require an account in order to be used, reference Google Pixels and specific Android devices requiring a Google account, and iPhones needing an Apple account.

=====in appliances=====
hvac app activation of furnace control boards (also an example of [[Forced app download]] (editors note hard to find credible ref this is a thing with ruud furnace control boards) )

====Binding hardware features to non-transferable user accounts / activation & licensing locks====
-wip

===Server connectivity reliance===
Also see: [[Subscription service]], [[Digital rights management]]
-wip

==Further reading / also see==
[[Digital rights management|DRM (digital right managment)]]

[[wikipedia:Comparison_of_open-source_and_closed-source_software|Proprietary Software]]

[[Walled garden]] / [[Software Ecosystem]]

[[Bootloader unlocking]]

[[wikipedia:Proprietary_firmware|Proprietary firmware]]

<references />

Template talk:StubNotice

2025-06-21T17:07:03Z

JP: /* Duplicate title text, simplify text */ Reply

==Duplicate title text, simplify text==

Two issues:

#The notice has 2 titles: "Article Status Notice: This Article is a stub" and "Notice: This Article Requires Additional Expansion". Can we look at having just a single title? Maybe just "This Article is a stub"
#The text of the notice is really long and obsures the article content. It would be really useful if the notice was similar to Wikipedia's by including a single sentence linking to the guidelines.

(Pinging @[[User:Keith|Keith]] so this gets some attention, sorry) [[User:JP|JP]] ([[User talk:JP|talk]]) 17:02, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

:This could also be added under a details item ("Show more"), just like the incomplete article notice. [[User:JP|JP]] ([[User talk:JP|talk]]) 17:07, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Template talk:StubNotice

2025-06-21T17:02:14Z

JP: /* Duplicate title text, simplify text */ new section

== Duplicate title text, simplify text ==

Two issues:

# The notice has 2 titles: "Article Status Notice: This Article is a stub" and "Notice: This Article Requires Additional Expansion". Can we look at having just a single title? Maybe just "This Article is a stub"
# The text of the notice is really long and obsures the article content. It would be really useful if the notice was similar to Wikipedia's by including a single sentence linking to the guidelines.

(Pinging @[[User:Keith|Keith]] so this gets some attention, sorry) [[User:JP|JP]] ([[User talk:JP|talk]]) 17:02, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Kernel level driver

2025-06-21T16:49:34Z

JP: Reword and format the article to flow better. Also corrected some terminology.

Kernel drivers, kernel modules, or drivers are modules of code that run inside the kernel of an operating system. Kernel drivers allow the computer to communicate with hardware devices such as keyboards, mice, storage, and network cards. Kernel access is required since these drivers usually manage hardware directly, which isn't possible in user space. This code is unresricted since it runs inside of the kernel, meaning drivers have the highest privledge level— higher than even the traditional administrator role. If kernel code fails, the entire system crashes. In comparision, user processes can gracefully exit without affecting other processes. Also, if a kernel driver has any vulnerabilities, these can be exploited by bad actors to gain kernel access and bypass any security measures the user has in place.

== Consumer Impact ==
Code running in the kernel presents numerous privacy and security concerns. Code running in the kernel can read the memory of any running process, including apps and websites used for banking, passwords, and other highly sensitive actions. Additionally, it has full control over all hardware, including the capability to permantely damage or disable hardware components.

Many companies now require the use of proprietary drivers in order to use applications that would work fine in user space, like [[Kernel Level Anti-Cheats]]. This gives these companies unrestricted access to a consumer's system, allowing for unmoderated data collection and control.

==Examples==

* [[wikipedia:CrowdStrike|CrowdStrike]]
* [[wikipedia:Cheating_in_online_games#Anti-cheating_methods_and_limitations|Anti-cheats]], like Easy Anti Cheat and EA Anti Cheat

== Incidents ==

* [[wikipedia:2024_CrowdStrike-related_IT_outages|2024 CrowdStrike-related IT outages]]

== See Also ==

* [[Kernel Level Anti-Cheats]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Common terms]]

Talk:Unjust and extraterritorial law: DMCA

2025-06-21T16:21:46Z

JP: /* Merge with existing article */ Reply

==Merge with existing article==

The [[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]] article already exists. I think we should merge this one into it. [[User:JP|JP]] ([[User talk:JP|talk]]) 19:44, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

:I agree. — [[User:Sojourna|Sojourna]] ([[User talk:Sojourna|talk]]) 00:12, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
:Perhaps it would be better to remove this article? The tone doesn't really fit with the wiki, and I'm getting some LLM vibes from the content. @[[User:Keith|Keith]] do we have a process for deletion? Maybe @[[User:HouseStationLive.com|HouseStationLive.com]] (the author of the article) can talk about how the article was drafted and what they think about the proposal. [[User:JP|JP]] ([[User talk:JP|talk]]) 16:21, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Mazda

2025-06-21T16:16:03Z

JP: /* Incidents */ Add existing incidents to the incidents section.

{{InfoboxCompany
| Name = {{PAGENAME}}
| Type =Public
| Founded =1920
| Industry =Automotive
| Official Website =https://www.mazda.com/
| Logo =QuestionMark.svg
}}'''Mazda Motor Corporation''' (マツダ株式会社, ''Matsuda Kabushiki gaisha'') is a Japanese multinational automotive manufacturer headquartered in Fuchū, Hiroshima, Japan.

==Consumer-impact summary==
{{Placeholder box|Overview of concerns that arise from the company's conduct regarding (if applicable):
* User freedom
* User privacy
* Business model
* Market control}}

==Incidents==
This is a list of all consumer-protection incidents this company is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|{{PAGENAME}} category]].

=== Mazda DMCA takedown of Home Assistant Integration (October 2023) ===
{{Main|Mazda DMCA takedown of Open Source Home Assistant App}}
On October 10th 2023 Mazda issued a DMCA takedown notice to github claiming the Home Assistant integration that adds connectivity with Mazda vehicles infringes on their intellectual properly rights by stealing code from their official app and wanted it, along with forks of the project, removed from the website. The developer did not want to challenge the claims and took down the repository within a few days to avoid potential legal repercussions. With the repository and all its forks gone, the integration was also removed from the Home Assistant app.

=== Mazda remote-start subscription (2019) ===
{{Main|Mazda remote-start subscription}}In 2019, Mazda introduced Mazda Connected Services, a feature enabling remote start and other functionalities through the MyMazda smartphone app. Customers, however, were only offered a three-year complimentary trial, after which continued access required a $10 monthly subscription. As these trials began expiring in 2023, affected users received notifications encouraging subscription enrollment.

==Products==
Mazda produces numerous veichles. Specific models include:

* ''None yet''

==See also==

*[[Allstate and Arity's alleged unauthorized driver data collection through mobile apps]]
*[[Texas Sues Allstate Over Illegally Collecting Driver Data; you might want to uninstall gasbuddy....]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]]

TeamViewer

2025-06-21T13:56:27Z

JP: Added stub notice

{{stub}}

TeamViewer has previously sold a "perpetual" license for versions 8-12, but after switching to a subscription-based Software As A Service model, they have pestered "perpetual" license owners to "upgrade" to a subscription license for their newer versions.

Recently, they have announced support will be fully shut down for these versions: [https://community.teamviewer.com/English/discussion/141015/end-of-support-for-teamviewer-versions-11-and-12/p1 https://community.teamviewer.com/English/discussion/141015/end-of-support-for-teamviewer-versions-11-and-12/]

Microsoft's anticompetitive practices

2025-06-21T13:54:08Z

JP: Add missing period

{{Incomplete|Issue 1=Needs more incident variety - Most, if not all of these incidents listed refer in some way to a browser developed by Microsoft. We should invest time into getting more anticompetitive incidents that are unrelated to browsers here for the sake of variety|Issue 2=Needs more source variety - Being mostly sources from The Verge acts more as an ad for the site rather than provide credibility to this article}}

The software company ''[[Microsoft]]'' has had a history of harming its competition on devices running ''[[Windows]]''. This is a historical list of every incident where ''[[Microsoft]]'' has harmed its competition.

==Background==
Soon after the introduction of applications that came preinstalled with ''[[Windows]]'', ''[[Microsoft]]'' has had the incentive to force users into the native applications installed, rather than any third-party programs. As an example, with the release of [[Windows|''Windows 10'']], the preinstalled web browser [[Microsoft Edge|''Microsoft Edge'']] has had a litany of incidents where the web browser forced users into using it rather than the browser the user installed.

==History of incidents==

===Anticompetitive lawsuits===

====United States v. '''Microsoft Corp.: 2000'''====
In the case ''United States v. Microsoft '''Corp.''','' 87 F. Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C. 2000),<ref>[https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/87/30/2307082/ "United States v. Microsoft Corp., 87 F. Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C. 2000)"] - law.justia.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref> '''''Microsoft'''''<nowiki/>'s conduct taken as a whole was described as a "deliberate assault upon entrepreneurial efforts that, could well have enabled the introduction of competition into the market for [[Intel]]-compatible PC operating systems". Further, "''Microsoft''<nowiki/>'s anti-competitive actions trammeled the competitive process through which the computer software industry generally stimulates innovation and conduces to the optimum benefit of consumers."

====US Department of Justice, U.S. v. '''Microsoft Corp.: 2001'''====
In a major antitrust case brought by the ''US Department of Justice'', ''U.S. v. Microsoft Corp.,'' 253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001),<ref>[https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/253/34/576095/ "U.S. v. Microsoft Corp., 253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001)"] - law.justia.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref> ''Microsoft'' argued that there was no barrier to entry in the market they were in. A central issue at that time was whether '''''Microsoft''''' could bundle the web browser ''Internet Explorer'' with the ''[[Windows|'''Microsoft''' Windows]]'' operating system. The ''District Court'' stated the following in the court case:<blockquote>"The District Court condemned a number of provisions in '''''Microsoft'''''<nowiki/>'s agreements licensing ''[[Windows]]'' to OEMs, because it found that ''Microsoft''<nowiki/>'s imposition of those provisions (like many of '''''Microsoft'''''<nowiki/>'s other actions at issue in this case) serves to reduce usage share of ''Netscape''<nowiki/>'s browser and, hence, protect '''''Microsoft'''''<nowiki/>'s operating system monopoly."</blockquote>The court specifically identified three main license restrictions for [[Original Equipment Manufacturers]] (OEMs) that were considered problematic:

#The prohibition upon the removal of desktop icons, folders, and Start menu entries
#The prohibition for modifying the initial boot sequence
#The prohibition of otherwise altering the appearance of the Windows desktop

The case was eventually settled,<ref>[https://www.justice.gov/atr/case-document/file/503541/dl "Final judgment of US v. Microsoft"] - justice.gov - accessed 2025-01-29</ref><ref>[https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/373/1199/474311/ "Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Ex Rel., Appellant, v. Microsoft Corporation"] - law.justia.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref> and did not result in a company breakup.<ref>[https://www.seattletimes.com/business/microsoft/long-antitrust-saga-ends-for-microsoft/ "Long antitrust saga ends for Microsoft"] - seattletimes.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref>

Section III.H of the Consent Decree<ref>[https://www.justice.gov/atr/microsoft-consent-decree-compliance-advisory-august-1-2003-us-v-microsoft "Microsoft Consent Decree Compliance Advisory - August 1, 2003 : U.S. V. Microsoft"] - justice.gov - accessed 2025-01-29</ref> required ''Microsoft'' to "allow end users and OEMs to enable or remove access to all middleware products, including web browsers, e-mail clients, and media players through a readily accessible, centralized mechanism." End users and OEMs should be able "to specify a non-''Microsoft'' middleware product as the default middleware product to be launched in place of the corresponding '''''Microsoft''''' middleware product."

===Microsoft Edge===

====Resetting primary browser: 2017 - Present====
[[Microsoft Edge|''Edge'']] has frequently been resetting the default browser to itself<ref>[https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/default-browser-keeps-changing-to-edge/25e2939d-4674-40ab-b05a-6161e2297976 "Default Browser Keeps Changing to Edge"] - answers.microsoft.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref> without consent from the user.<ref name=":1">[https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/windows-10-update-reset-my-computer-settings/e58bcee8-f4c9-40ef-a452-1dc5db7c45d9 "Windows 10 Update Reset my Computer Settings."] - answers.microsoft.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref> While there are methods available online to disable this,<ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/techsupport/comments/15zbjar/default_browser_keeps_changing_to_microsoft_edge/ "Default browser keeps changing to Microsoft Edge after every PC restart. Win 11, tried everything"] - reddit.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref> it is tedious to achieve, especially for users who are not tech-savvy.

====Inability to permanently remove the browser: 2018 - Present====
During major updates for ''[[Windows]]'', users have been reporting their installations of [[Microsoft Edge|''Edge'']] being reinstalled to their devices without their consent.<ref>[https://www.windowscentral.com/how-prevent-microsoft-edge-chromium-installing-automatically-windows-10 "How to prevent new Microsoft Edge from installing automatically on Windows 10"] - windowscentral.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref>

====Importing content from other browsers without consent: 2020 - Unknown====
Users have reported on frequent occasions that [[Microsoft Edge|''Edge'']] has imported user data from browsers such as [[Google Chrome|''Chrome'']] and [[Mozilla Firefox|''Firefox'']] without first requesting consent from the user.<ref>[https://www.komando.com/news/microsoft-edge-caught-importing-data/ "Microsoft caught importing data before you give the OK"] - komando.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref>

====Harassing users into using Edge: 2020 - Unknown====
In 2020, users for [[Windows|Windows 10]] faced repeated harassment from Edge to use this browser instead of the user's chosen default browser.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Hollister |first=Sean |date=Jul 2, 2020 |title=With Edge, Microsoft’s forced Windows updates just sank to a new low |url=https://www.theverge.com/21310611/microsoft-edge-browser-forced-update-chromium-editorial |access-date=Jun 21, 2025 |work=The Verge}}</ref> Some examples included the browser opening on startup, the browser being forced into full screen, being incapable of closing the browser until the user acknowledges the pop-up, and the browser pinning itself to the taskbar.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Van Hemert |first=Taran |date=Jul 2, 2020 |title=Tweet from Taran Van Hemert |url=https://x.com/TaranVH/status/1278758217074405377?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1278758217074405377%7Ctwgr%5Ee004e3bc5652ed5a81062f5862eaf9a63967a58c%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theverge.com%2F21310611%2Fmicrosoft-edge-browser-forced-update-chromium-editorial |access-date=Jun 21, 2025 |website=X, formerly [[Twitter]]}}</ref>

====Prompts to stop users from installing competing browsers: 2021 - Present====
[[File:MS Edge pop-up.png|thumb|A [https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/2/22813733/microsoft-windows-edge-download-chrome-prompts screenshot] that shows an example of Edge harassing the user into using Edge.]]
Since '''December 2021''', users who install other web browsers, such as ''[[Google Chrome|Chrome]], [[Brave browser|Brave]], or [[Opera web browser|Opera]],'' will face a pop-up on their screen telling users to instead use [[Microsoft Edge|''Edge'']].<ref>{{Cite news |last=Warren |first=Tom |date=Dec 2, 2021 |title=Microsoft’s new Windows prompts try to stop people downloading Chrome |url=https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/2/22813733/microsoft-windows-edge-download-chrome-prompts |access-date=Jun 21, 2025 |work=The Verge}}</ref> Some of the messages of these pop-ups include:<ref>{{Cite news |last=Sen |first=Sayan |date=Dec 2, 2021 |title=Microsoft says its own Edge browser is more trustworthy than "so 2008" Google Chrome |url=https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-says-its-own-edge-browser-is-more-trustworthy-than-so-2008-google-chrome/ |access-date=Jun 21, 2025 |work=Neowin}}</ref><blockquote>“Microsoft Edge runs on the same technology as Chrome, with the added trust of Microsoft.”

“That browser is so 2008! Do you know what’s new? Microsoft Edge.”

“‘I hate saving money,’ said no one ever. Microsoft Edge is the best browser for online shopping.”</blockquote>This has been reported to occur on devices running either ''[[Windows|Windows 10]]'' or ''[[Windows|Windows 11]]'', and frequently aims to directly harm the market share of Chrome,<ref>{{Cite news |last=Hollister |first=Sean |date=Oct 24, 2024 |title=Microsoft now thirstily injects a poll when you download Google Chrome |url=https://www.theverge.com/23930960/microsoft-edge-google-chrome-poll-why-try-another-browser |access-date=Jun 21, 2025 |work=The Verge}}</ref> despite the browser itself running on the same codebase as ''[[Chromium]]''.

===Windows 11===

====Increasing the difficulty to switch default browsers: 2021 - Present====
After an update in 2021, computers running ''[[Windows 11]]'' had the systems that handled modifying the web browser defaults.<ref name=":0">{{Cite news |last=Warren |first=Tom |date=Aug 18, 2021 |title=Microsoft is making it harder to switch default browsers in Windows 11 |url=https://www.theverge.com/22630319/microsoft-windows-11-default-browser-changes |access-date=Jun 21, 2025 |work=The Verge}}</ref> Rather than allow the user to simply switch the default web browser, file types typically accessed via web browsers, such as HTM, HTML, SVG, and more have to be individually modified to have the default opening application changed. This has angered companies maintaining competing web browsers<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Lockheimer |first=Hiroshi |date=Aug 18, 2021 |title=Tweet from Hiroshi Lockheimer |url=https://x.com/lockheimer/status/1428047760620621831?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1428047760620621831%7Ctwgr%5E9ac6cc57ee0013acb388128e04c3a43f4cd79c94%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theverge.com%2F22630319%2Fmicrosoft-windows-11-default-browser-changes |access-date=Jun 21, 2025 |website=X, formerly [[Twitter]]}}</ref> and consumers alike over this change.

Even if users modify all of these default settings, other features on the device, such as the taskbar's weather widget, which if opened, will create a new tab specifically in ''[[Microsoft Edge|Edge]]''.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite news |last=Warren |first=Tom |date=Apr 22, 2021 |title=Microsoft’s new Windows 10 taskbar widget starts rolling out today |url=https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/22/22397237/microsoft-windows-10-taskbar-weather-news-widget-feature-available-now |access-date=Jun 21, 2025 |work=The Verge}}</ref>

Microsoft attempts to justify this by stating:<ref name=":0" /><blockquote>“With Windows 11, we are implementing customer feedback to customize and control defaults at a more granular level, eliminating app categories and elevating all apps to the forefront of the defaults experience,”

“As evidenced by this change, we’re constantly listening and learning, and welcome customer feedback that helps shape Windows. Windows 11 will continue to evolve over time; if we learn from user experience that there are ways to make improvements, we will do so.”</blockquote>

===Bing web search===

====Attempting to harm competing web browsers: 2023 - Unknown====
[[File:Bing search comparison.png|thumb|A side-by-side comparison between the [[Brave browser]] and [[Microsoft Edge]], where [[Microsoft Bing|Bing]] attempts to sway the user away from switching the browser.]]
When doing a web search for an alternative web browser through ''[[Microsoft Bing|Bing]]'', ''[[Microsoft]]''<nowiki/>'s in-house developed [[wikipedia:Search_engine|search engine]] that is also used as the default for ''[[Microsoft Edge|Edge]]'', the [[wikipedia:Search_engine|search engine]]'s AI will attempt to bury the search results for the web browser from the user.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Hollister |first=Sean |date=Jun 6, 2023 |title=Microsoft has no shame: Bing spit on my ‘Chrome’ search with a fake AI answer |url=https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/6/23736289/microsoft-bing-chrome-search-fake-ai-chatbot |access-date=Jun 21, 2025 |work=The Verge}}</ref>

Beyond this, users specifically using both ''[[Microsoft Edge|Edge]]'' and its [[Microsoft Bing|default search engine]] will continue to see harassment at the top of the search, attempting to keep the user on the browser.

====Disguising itself as another search engine: 2025 - Present====
Currently, when a user does a web search for "[[Google]]", the search engine will disguise itself as a generic search engine that would appear to look like Google in the eyes of the average user.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Warren |first=Tom |date=Jan 6, 2025 |title=Microsoft is using Bing to trick people into thinking they’re on Google |url=https://www.theverge.com/2025/1/6/24337117/microsoft-bing-search-results-google-design-trick |access-date=Jun 21, 2025 |work=The Verge}}</ref>

===Family Safety===

====Blocking Chrome from launching: 2025 - Present====
A feature seen within ''[[Windows|Windows 11]]''<nowiki/>'s parental controls is Family Safety. A key problem shown from this feature is that it can questionably ban certain applications from properly running on the device, with no notice to the administrator in charge of the device. In '''June 2025''', this feature banned the string "Chrome",<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |last=u/Witty-Discount-2906 |date=Jun 3, 2025 |title=Chrome won’t open (Windows 11) |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/chrome/comments/1l2c552/comment/mvt1w2a/ |access-date=Jun 20, 2025 |website=[[Reddit]]}}</ref> which blocked the web browser [[Google Chrome|''Chrome'']] from functioning.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Warren |first=Tom |date=Jun 20, 2025 |title=Microsoft is blocking Google Chrome through its family safety feature |url=https://www.theverge.com/news/690179/microsoft-block-google-chrome-family-safety-feature |access-date=Jun 20, 2025 |work=The Verge}}</ref> Schools in particular use this feature on devices given out for students to complete classwork remotely, and as [[Google Chrome|''Chrome'']] holds the majority market share of web browser usage, (65-70%)<ref>{{Cite web |date=May 1, 2025 |title=Browser Market Share Worldwide |url=https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/ |access-date=Jun 20, 2025 |website=Statcounter}}</ref> there has been mass reports of students being unable to complete their classwork strictly due to this flaw.<ref name=":4">{{Cite news |last=Priestley |first=Peter |date=Jun 4, 2025 |title=Microsoft Family Safety Blocking Chrome Browser |url=https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_11-wintop_famsafety/microsoft-family-safety-blocking-chrome-browser/40023ef5-177b-4eed-a857-80ed15afa3a5?rtAction=1749008739548&page=1 |access-date=Jun 20, 2025 |work=Microsoft Answers}}</ref>

Currently, ''Microsoft'' has neglected to inform users on rolling out a fix in the future,<ref>{{Cite web |date=Jun 3, 2025 |title=[User Feedback - Stable] M137 Windows - Increase in feedback about crashing |url=https://issues.chromium.org/issues/422222571 |access-date=Jun 20, 2025 |website=Chromium issues}}</ref> and the only solutions available to users is to either rename the executable on the affected device<ref name=":3" /> or disable "Block inappropriate browsing" inside the ''Family Safety'' settings.<ref name=":4" />

==References==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Microsoft]]
[[Category:Anti-Consumer Practices]]

User talk:JP

2025-06-14T20:52:09Z

JP: Create talk page for me (empty for now)

List of phones that do not allow bootloader unlock

2025-06-14T12:15:06Z

JP: /* Examples[3] */ Added Google Pixel using Verizon to the list

A bootloader is a program that runs when the phone turns on and loads the operating system. <ref>{{Cite web |title=GNU Grub website |url=https://www.gnu.org/software/grub/index.html}}</ref> Most phones lock the bootloader by default, which means that a new bootloader or operating system can't be installed on the phone. <ref>{{Cite web |title=Lock and unlock the bootloader |url=https://source.android.com/docs/core/architecture/bootloader/locking_unlocking |website=Android Open Source project}}</ref>

==How it works==
Some manufacturers do not allow unlocking the bootloader even if the phone is not under a contract. Some manufacturers allow to unlock the bootloader on some regions, or require a payment or an online connection to unlock the phone. Some manufacturers may void the warranty or block certain features permanently if the bootloader is unlocked

==Why it is a problem==
If the bootloader cannot be unlocked the operating system can't be modified in any way which is not allowed by the manufacturer.

==Examples<ref>{{Cite web |last= |first= |title=Bootloader wall of shame |url=https://github.com/melontini/bootloader-unlock-wall-of-shame |website=GitHub}}</ref>==

*Huawei
*HMD Global/Nokia
*Vivo/IQOO
*ZTE
*Meizu
*Asus
*Alcatel
*Apple
*Energizer
*Cat
*Sharp
*Doogee
*TCL
*Coolpad
*Realme (on some regions)
*OPPO (outside China)
*Xiaomi (China only)
*Samsung (USA only)
*HTC
*Motorola (on some devices)
*Google Pixel (Verizon)

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Common terms]]

Google Play Integrity API

2025-06-11T05:31:04Z

JP: /* Consumer impact summary */Fixed typo (on -> of)

The Play Integrity API is an API provided by [[Google]] for the [[Android]] Operating System that allows applications to verify the genuineness of the app's binary and Android version.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Overview of the Play Integrity API |url=https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/overview |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250607124755/https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/overview |archive-date=2025-06-07 |access-date=2025-06-10 |website=Android Developers}}</ref> It is the successor of the now deprecated SafetyNet Attestation API.<ref>{{Cite web |title=About the SafetyNet Attestation API deprecation |url=https://developer.android.com/privacy-and-security/safetynet/deprecation-timeline |website=Android Developers}}</ref> The API offers 4 device integrity labels, which are detailed in the table below.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Integrity verdicts |url=https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/verdicts#device-integrity-field |website=Android Developers}}</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Integrity Level
!Bootloader Can Be Unlocked
!Customized OSes Allowed
!Description
!Requirement(s)
|-
|<code>MEETS_BASIC_INTEGRITY</code>
|{{Yes}}
|{{Yes}}
|The app is running on a device that passes basic system integrity checks. The device may not be Play Protect certified.
|Attestation root of trust provided by Google
|-
|<code>MEETS_VIRTUAL_INTEGRITY</code>
| style="vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;" |Unknown
| style="vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;" |Unknown
|The app is running on an Android-powered emulator with Google Play services.
|The emulator passes system integrity checks and meets core Android compatibility requirements.
|-
|<code>MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY</code>
|{{No}}
|{{No}}
|The app is running on a genuine Play Protect certified Android-powered device.
|Hardware-backed proof that the device bootloader is locked and the loaded Android OS is a certified device manufacturer image.
|-
|<code>MEETS_STRONG_INTEGRITY</code>
|{{No}}
|{{No}}
|The app is running on a genuine Play Protect certified Android-powered device with a recent security update.
|Android 13+: <code>MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY</code> and security updates in the last year for all partitions of the device, including an Android OS partition patch and a vendor partition patch.
Android 12 and lower: Only hardware-backed proof of boot integrity
|}

==Consumer impact summary==
Since the Play Integrity API relies on Google to certify devices, any apps requiring <code>MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY</code> or <code>MEETS_STRONG_INTEGRITY</code> are only allowed on operating systems that Google allows. This allows Google to exert [[Monopoly|monopolistic]] power by not certifying competitors' operating systems, since many apps choose to use the Play Integrity API instead of the Key Attestation API that is built into Android.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Apps & Games need PI |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/4677050/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Verify hardware-backed key pairs with key attestation |url=https://developer.android.com/privacy-and-security/security-key-attestation |website=Android Developers}}</ref>

Notable examples include of apps requiring Google-certified operating systems:

* Google Wallet
* VPN by Google
* Netflix
* McDonald's
* Uber Driver
* Twitter/X
* Twilio Authy Authenticator
* ChatGPT<ref>{{Cite web |title=PlayIntegrity Verification failed - ChatGPT / Bugs |url=https://community.openai.com/t/1267945 |website=OpenAI Developer Community}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Question - ChatGPT error: Preauth Playintegrity verification failed |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/4737618/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref>

The has led to users being unable to use apps on privacy-focused forks of Android, like [[GrapheneOS]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Wallet - Google Pay |url=https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/475/ |website=GrapheneOS Discussion Forum}}</ref>

==See also==
[https://mayrhofer.eu.org/courses/android-security/selected-paper/2024/Comparing_key_attestation_and_Play_Integrity_API.pdf Android System Integrity: Comparing Key Attestation and the Play Integrity API]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Android]]

User:JP

2025-06-10T20:46:38Z

JP: Added my user page.

Hi, I'm James, a FOSS Programmer and Game Developer. I started taking my privacy and consumer rights seriously after finding Louis Rossman's YouTube channel in late 2024. I daily drive Fedora and Android, though I plan on moving to GrapheneOS as soon as I can. You can find me on [https://github.com/james-pre GitHub] or reach out to [mailto:cr-wiki@jamespre.dev cr-wiki@jamespre.dev].

Talk:Unjust and extraterritorial law: DMCA

2025-06-10T19:44:14Z

JP: /* Merge with existing article */ new section

Google Play Integrity API

2025-06-10T18:36:00Z

JP:

The Play Integrity API is an API provided by [[Google]] for the [[Android]] Operating System that allows applications to verify the genuineness of the app's binary and Android version.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Overview of the Play Integrity API |url=https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/overview |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250607124755/https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/overview |archive-date=2025-06-07 |access-date=2025-06-10 |website=Android Developers}}</ref> It is the successor of the now deprecated SafetyNet Attestation API.<ref>{{Cite web |title=About the SafetyNet Attestation API deprecation |url=https://developer.android.com/privacy-and-security/safetynet/deprecation-timeline |website=Android Developers}}</ref> The API offers 4 device integrity labels, which are detailed in the table below.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Integrity verdicts |url=https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/verdicts#device-integrity-field |website=Android Developers}}</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Integrity Level
!Bootloader Can Be Unlocked
!Customized OSes Allowed
!Description
!Requirement(s)
|-
|<code>MEETS_BASIC_INTEGRITY</code>
|{{Yes}}
|{{Yes}}
|The app is running on a device that passes basic system integrity checks. The device may not be Play Protect certified.
|Attestation root of trust provided by Google
|-
|<code>MEETS_VIRTUAL_INTEGRITY</code>
| style="vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;" |Unknown
| style="vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;" |Unknown
|The app is running on an Android-powered emulator with Google Play services.
|The emulator passes system integrity checks and meets core Android compatibility requirements.
|-
|<code>MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY</code>
|{{No}}
|{{No}}
|The app is running on a genuine Play Protect certified Android-powered device.
|Hardware-backed proof that the device bootloader is locked and the loaded Android OS is a certified device manufacturer image.
|-
|<code>MEETS_STRONG_INTEGRITY</code>
|{{No}}
|{{No}}
|The app is running on a genuine Play Protect certified Android-powered device with a recent security update.
|Android 13+: <code>MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY</code> and security updates in the last year for all partitions of the device, including an Android OS partition patch and a vendor partition patch.
Android 12 and lower: Only hardware-backed proof of boot integrity
|}

==Consumer impact summary==
Since the Play Integrity API relies on Google to certify devices, any apps requiring <code>MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY</code> or <code>MEETS_STRONG_INTEGRITY</code> are only allowed on operating systems that Google allows. This allows Google to exert [[Monopoly|monopolistic]] power by not certifying competitors' operating systems, since many apps choose to use the Play Integrity API instead of the Key Attestation API that is built into Android.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Apps & Games need PI |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/4677050/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Verify hardware-backed key pairs with key attestation |url=https://developer.android.com/privacy-and-security/security-key-attestation |website=Android Developers}}</ref>

Notable examples include of apps requiring Google-certified operating systems:

* Google Wallet
* VPN by Google
* Netflix
* McDonald's
* Uber Driver
* Twitter/X
* Twilio Authy Authenticator
* ChatGPT<ref>{{Cite web |title=PlayIntegrity Verification failed - ChatGPT / Bugs |url=https://community.openai.com/t/1267945 |website=OpenAI Developer Community}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Question - ChatGPT error: Preauth Playintegrity verification failed |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/4737618/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref>

The has led to users being unable to use apps on privacy-focused forks on Android, like [[GrapheneOS]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Wallet - Google Pay |url=https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/475/ |website=GrapheneOS Discussion Forum}}</ref>

==See also==
[https://mayrhofer.eu.org/courses/android-security/selected-paper/2024/Comparing_key_attestation_and_Play_Integrity_API.pdf Android System Integrity: Comparing Key Attestation and the Play Integrity API]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Android]]

Google Play Integrity API

2025-06-10T18:33:34Z

JP:

The Play Integrity API is an API provided by [[Google]] for the [[Android]] Operating System that allows applications to verify the genuineness of the apps binary and Android version.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Overview of the Play Integrity API |url=https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/overview |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250607124755/https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/overview |archive-date=2025-06-07 |access-date=2025-06-10 |website=Android Developers}}</ref> It is the successor of the now deprecated SafetyNet Attestation API.<ref>{{Cite web |title=About the SafetyNet Attestation API deprecation |url=https://developer.android.com/privacy-and-security/safetynet/deprecation-timeline |website=Android Developers}}</ref> The API offers 4 device integrity labels, which are detailed in the table below.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Integrity verdicts |url=https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/verdicts#device-integrity-field |website=Android Developers}}</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Integrity Level
!Bootloader Can Be Unlocked
!Customized OSes Allowed
!Description
!Requirement(s)
|-
|<code>MEETS_BASIC_INTEGRITY</code>
|{{Yes}}
|{{Yes}}
|The app is running on a device that passes basic system integrity checks. The device may not be Play Protect certified.
|Attestation root of trust provided by Google
|-
|<code>MEETS_VIRTUAL_INTEGRITY</code>
| style="vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;" |Unknown
| style="vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;" |Unknown
|The app is running on an Android-powered emulator with Google Play services.
|The emulator passes system integrity checks and meets core Android compatibility requirements.
|-
|<code>MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY</code>
|{{No}}
|{{No}}
|The app is running on a genuine Play Protect certified Android-powered device.
|Hardware-backed proof that the device bootloader is locked and the loaded Android OS is a certified device manufacturer image.
|-
|<code>MEETS_STRONG_INTEGRITY</code>
|{{No}}
|{{No}}
|The app is running on a genuine Play Protect certified Android-powered device with a recent security update.
|Android 13+: <code>MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY</code> and security updates in the last year for all partitions of the device, including an Android OS partition patch and a vendor partition patch.
Android 12 and lower: Only hardware-backed proof of boot integrity
|}

==Consumer impact summary==
Since the Play Integrity API relies on Google to certify devices, any apps requiring <code>MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY</code> or <code>MEETS_STRONG_INTEGRITY</code> are only allowed on operating systems that Google allows. This allows Google to exert [[Monopoly|monopolistic]] power by not certifying competitors' operating systems, since many apps choose to use the Play Integrity API instead of the Key Attestation API that is built into Android.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Apps & Games need PI |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/4677050/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Verify hardware-backed key pairs with key attestation |url=https://developer.android.com/privacy-and-security/security-key-attestation |website=Android Developers}}</ref>

Notable examples include of apps requiring Google-certified operating systems:

* Google Wallet
* VPN by Google
* Netflix
* McDonald's
* Uber Driver
* Twitter/X
* Twilio Authy Authenticator
* ChatGPT<ref>{{Cite web |title=PlayIntegrity Verification failed - ChatGPT / Bugs |url=https://community.openai.com/t/1267945 |website=OpenAI Developer Community}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Question - ChatGPT error: Preauth Playintegrity verification failed |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/4737618/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref>

The has led to users being unable to use apps on privacy-focused forks on Android, like [[GrapheneOS]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Wallet - Google Pay |url=https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/475/ |website=GrapheneOS Discussion Forum}}</ref>

==See also==
[https://mayrhofer.eu.org/courses/android-security/selected-paper/2024/Comparing_key_attestation_and_Play_Integrity_API.pdf Android System Integrity: Comparing Key Attestation and the Play Integrity API]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Android]]

Google Play Integrity API

2025-06-10T18:30:47Z

JP: Added an article for the Play Integrity API

Apps deliberately refusing to work on modded devices

2025-06-10T18:11:07Z

JP: Shorten URL for reference to discourse forum thread

{{StubNotice}}
Apps running on Android and potentially other operating systems can detect if the device has been modded and refuse to function if that is the case. This can happen if the device allows the user to run applications as root or administrator, has an unlocked bootloader or runs a different operating system than the one provided by the manufacturer.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=Apps & Games need PI |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/4677050/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Configure API responses |url=https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/setup#configure-api |website=Google}}</ref>

==How it works==
Phones and PCs include a Trusted Platform Module <ref>{{Cite web |title=Trusted Platform Module |url=http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=pos1R1003970&aid=1 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160803203400/http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=pos1R1003970&aid=1 |archive-date=2016-08-03}}</ref>: a chip independent from the device's CPU and can only run software signed by the device manufacturer. This chip allows applications to use a technique called remote attestation to detect if the operating system has been tampered in any way and in such a case block functionality or refuse to work altogether. If done properly remote attestation is impossible to spoof, even by the owner of the device.
==Why it is a problem==
The owner of the phone is unable to do the following (while continue to use applications that block modded devices)

*update the device operating system once it is no longer supported by the device manufacturer
*use alternative operating systems such as Linux or other Android-based operating systems that add new features
*remove all bloatware
*access all data stored on the device

Since many businesses and governments require their customers to download their proprietary application to their phones in order to use their services (see [[Forced app download]]), and many of those applications refuse to work on a modded device, people are left unable to modify their phone as they wish, or else they wouldn't be able to interact with those businesses that require or heavily encourage their app.

==Examples==

===Android<ref name=":0" />===
{{Main|Google Play Integrity API}}
*Google Wallet
*VPN by Google for Pixel
*Netflix
*McDonald's App
*Google Messages (RCS does not work when device is modded)
*Uber Driver
*Twitter/X
*Twilio Authy Authenticator
*ChatGPT<ref>{{Cite web |title=PlayIntegrity Verification failed - ChatGPT / Bugs |url=https://community.openai.com/t/1267945 |website=OpenAI Developer Community}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Question - ChatGPT error: Preauth Playintegrity verification failed |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/4737618/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref>
==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Common terms]]

Apps deliberately refusing to work on modded devices

2025-06-10T18:09:38Z

JP: Format examples section for different operating systems and add a "Main article" link (WIP)

{{StubNotice}}
Apps running on Android and potentially other operating systems can detect if the device has been modded and refuse to function if that is the case. This can happen if the device allows the user to run applications as root or administrator, has an unlocked bootloader or runs a different operating system than the one provided by the manufacturer.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=Apps & Games need PI |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/apps-games-need-pi-list.4677050/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Configure API responses |url=https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/setup#configure-api |website=Google}}</ref>

==How it works==
Phones and PCs include a Trusted Platform Module <ref>{{Cite web |title=Trusted Platform Module |url=http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=pos1R1003970&aid=1 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160803203400/http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=pos1R1003970&aid=1 |archive-date=2016-08-03}}</ref>: a chip independent from the device's CPU and can only run software signed by the device manufacturer. This chip allows applications to use a technique called remote attestation to detect if the operating system has been tampered in any way and in such a case block functionality or refuse to work altogether. If done properly remote attestation is impossible to spoof, even by the owner of the device.
==Why it is a problem==
The owner of the phone is unable to do the following (while continue to use applications that block modded devices)

*update the device operating system once it is no longer supported by the device manufacturer
*use alternative operating systems such as Linux or other Android-based operating systems that add new features
*remove all bloatware
*access all data stored on the device

Since many businesses and governments require their customers to download their proprietary application to their phones in order to use their services (see [[Forced app download]]), and many of those applications refuse to work on a modded device, people are left unable to modify their phone as they wish, or else they wouldn't be able to interact with those businesses that require or heavily encourage their app.

==Examples==

===Android<ref name=":0" />===
{{Main|Google Play Integrity API}}
*Google Wallet
*VPN by Google for Pixel
*Netflix
*McDonald's App
*Google Messages (RCS does not work when device is modded)
*Uber Driver
*Twitter/X
*Twilio Authy Authenticator
*ChatGPT<ref>{{Cite web |title=PlayIntegrity Verification failed - ChatGPT / Bugs |url=https://community.openai.com/t/1267945 |website=OpenAI Developer Community}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Question - ChatGPT error: Preauth Playintegrity verification failed |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/4737618/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref>
==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Common terms]]

Template:No

2025-06-10T17:30:30Z

JP: Created page with "<noinclude>{| class="wikitable" |- |</noinclude>style="background:#FFC4C4;color:black;vertical-align:middle;text-align:{{{align|center}}};{{{style|}}}" class="table-no"|{{{1|No}}}<noinclude> |} {{documentation}} </noinclude>"

<noinclude>{| class="wikitable"
|-
|</noinclude>style="background:#FFC4C4;color:black;vertical-align:middle;text-align:{{{align|center}}};{{{style|}}}" class="table-no"|{{{1|No}}}<noinclude>
|}
{{documentation}}
</noinclude>

Template:Yes

2025-06-10T17:27:12Z

JP: Added "Yes" template for use in tables

<noinclude>
{| class="wikitable"
|-
|</noinclude>style="background:#8FFF8F;color:black;vertical-align:middle;text-align:{{{align|center}}};{{{style|}}}" class="table-yes"|{{{1|Yes}}}<noinclude>
|}
{{documentation}}
</noinclude>

Apps deliberately refusing to work on modded devices

2025-06-10T13:54:00Z

JP: Added ChatGPT to the list of apps

Apps running on Android and potentially other operating systems can detect if the device has been modded and refuse to function if that is the case. This can happen if the device allows the user to run applications as root or administrator, has an unlocked bootloader or runs a different operating system than the one provided by the manufacturer.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=Apps & Games need PI |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/apps-games-need-pi-list.4677050/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Configure API responses |url=https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/setup#configure-api |website=Google}}</ref>

==How it works==
Phones and PCs include a Trusted Platform Module <ref>{{Cite web |title=Trusted Platform Module |url=http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=pos1R1003970&aid=1 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160803203400/http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=pos1R1003970&aid=1 |archive-date=2016-08-03}}</ref>: a chip independent from the device's CPU and can only run software signed by the device manufacturer. This chip allows applications to use a technique called remote attestation to detect if the operating system has been tampered in any way and in such a case block functionality or refuse to work altogether. If done properly remote attestation is impossible to spoof, even by the owner of the device.
==Why it is a problem==
The owner of the phone is unable to do the following (while continue to use applications that block modded devices)

*update the device operating system once it is no longer supported by the device manufacturer
*use alternative operating systems such as Linux or other Android-based operating systems that add new features
*remove all bloatware
*access all data stored on the device

Since many businesses and governments require their customers to download their proprietary application to their phones in order to use their services (see [[Forced app download]]), and many of those applications refuse to work on a modded device, people are left unable to modify their phone as they wish, or else they wouldn't be able to interact with those businesses that require or heavily encourage their app.

==Examples<ref name=":0" />==

*Google Wallet
*VPN by Google for Pixel
*Netflix
*McDonald's App
*Google Messages (RCS does not work when device is modded)
*Uber Driver
*Twitter/X
*Twilio Authy Authenticator
*ChatGPT<ref>{{Cite web |title=PlayIntegrity Verification failed - ChatGPT / Bugs |url=https://community.openai.com/t/1267945 |website=OpenAI Developer Community}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Question - ChatGPT error: Preauth Playintegrity verification failed |url=https://xdaforums.com/t/4737618/ |website=XDA Forums}}</ref> 

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Common terms]]

Hidden EULA language

2025-01-17T00:50:18Z

JP: Changed "&" to "and" for formality

"EULA roofie" describes the practice of hiding contentious terms within an End User License Agreement (EULA). The term applies to situations where such terms, if made clear upfront, might cause a customer to second-guess their purchase. The term was coined by consumer rights advocate [[wikipedia:Louis_Rossmann|Louis Rossmann]][source?].

This term higlights the unethical business practice of "manufacturing consent" for terms which a reasonable and informed customer might reject. It also emphasizes the erosion of informed consent through shaming and conformity.

By hiding contentious or unconscionable terms in dense legal documents, manufacturers exploit:

# the consumer's lack of proficiency in understanding legal documents,
# the impracticality of reading long documents in order to meet one's basic human needs.

The "EULA roofie" applies to individuals and corporations that utilize these practices to secure and manufacture consent under these false pretenses.

According to Rossmann, just as drugging someone ("roofying") to secure agreement is indefensible, so too is the act of concealing ethically or morally questionable terms in the fine print of a contract. The term "EULA roofie" attempts to draw a greater degree of societal scorn, scrutiny, and condemnation towards these actions, as they are seen at best as a minor legal nuisance rather than a disregard for informed consent and human rights.

== Core Concept ==
The term "EULA roofie" describes three key deceptive practices:

# Burying unattractive terms deep within an End User License Agreement (while avoiding mention of them in marketing materials and customer-facing interfaces).
# Making the full terms impractical or impossible for the customer to meaningfully review.
# Pointing to the End User License Agreement as a justification for unpopular practices.

== Notable Examples ==

=== Sony PlayStation Store ===
Sony prominently displays ''"PURCHASE"'' buttons for digital content but buries a redefinition of the word "purchase" in Section 10.1 of their Terms of Service:<ref>PLAYSTATIONTM NETWORK TERMS OF SERVICE AND USER AGREEMENT, December 30th, 2023: https://web.archive.org/web/20231230163548/https://www.playstation.com/en-us/legal/psn-terms-of-service/</ref>

<blockquote>"Use of the terms 'own,' 'ownership', 'purchase,' 'sale,' 'sold,' 'sell,' 'rent' or 'buy'... does not mean or imply any transfer of ownership..."</blockquote>

This became an issue in 2023 when Sony and Discovery removed previously ''"''purchased''"'' content from users' libraries, citing terms hidden in their service agreement.<ref>Playstation Video Content: Legal Update Notice https://web.archive.org/web/20231203150040/https://www.playstation.com/en-us/legal/psvideocontent/</ref>

Placing disclaimers such as ''"''We may take away and remove television and movies you bought & paid for at any time, because purchase doesn't mean purchase anymore''"'' next to the ''"''Add to cart''"'' button would understandably negatively affect sales. Therefore, Sony buries this information on page 21 of their Terms of Service.

=== Smart Appliance Data Collection & Third-Party Data Sharing ===
[[File:LG ThinQ app terms of service part 1.webp|alt=LG ThinQ app terms of service from July 2024, for use of an LG smart washing machine|thumb|LG ThinQ app terms of service from July 2024, for use of an LG smart washing machine]]
[[File:LG ThinQ app TOS.webp|alt=LG ThinQ app terms of service from July 2024, for use of an LG smart washing machine: part 2 of 3.|thumb|LG ThinQ app terms of service from July 2024, for use of an LG smart washing machine: part 2 of 3.]]
[[File:LG ThinQ app terms of service from July 2024, for use of an LG smart washing machine- part 3 of 3..webp|thumb]]

LG Electronics (among others) require users to accept extensive terms of service and privacy policies to use the "smart" features on home appliances, such as washing machines.

While the "smart" features may have time-saving benefits, the time required to actually read and decipher these documents (''often 3+ hours, especially for non-tech-savvy users'') negates any time-saving benefits of the smart features themselves. This makes meaningful informed consent impractical.

A consumer has to read the complete Privacy Policy (''see attached images below'') to learn that LG collects their personal data and shares it with their advertising partners. Futhermore, this Privacy Policy is only shown to the customer once they have bought the LG product.

== Consumer Impact ==
The practice undermines informed consent in digital transactions by:

* Using lengthy documents (often 50+ pages) to hide terms that deprive the consumer of their privacy and their rights
* Employing complex legal language to obscure the real meaning of agreements.
* Placing important information deep within documents where it is unlikely to be found.
* Presenting one meaning of terms (like "purchase") in the user interface while legally defining them differently in hidden terms.

== Legal Context ==
While EULAs and Terms of Service are legally binding documents, the "''EULA roofie''" concept challenges their legitimacy by highlighting how they may violate principles of contract law such as:

* Meeting of the minds (mutual understanding between parties).
* Good faith dealing.
* Reasonable notice of terms.
* Unconscionability (terms so unfair they shock the conscience).

== Consumer Protection Response ==
The concept has been used in advocacy for:

* Plain language requirements in consumer agreements.
* Prominent disclosure of significant terms.
* Reform of digital ownership rights.

== References ==

[[Category:Common Term]]

Roku

2025-01-17T00:46:42Z

JP: Fixed grammer (A, B -> A and B)

Roku Inc. is an American technology company, founded in October of 2002, known for their "Roku" line of products, which consist of Smart TVs & streaming players.
=== [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/Post-purchase_EULA_modification Post-purchase EULA modification] ===
In early March of 2024, Roku Inc. changed their EULA, which was after the company disclosed a data breach that affected over 15,000 accounts.

This new EULA was enforced onto pre-existing users in the form of a message on their Smart TV/streaming player, which only allowed the user to accept the new terms, and not decline. The only option Roku Inc. offered to opt-out of the new EULA was for the user to mail the company their contact information and email used to register the Roku account (if applicable), and the product model, software, or service "at issue".

In this new EULA, Roku Inc. included a [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/Forced_Arbitration Forced Arbitration] agreement to not allow users to sue, or to take part in lawsuits against Roku Inc.

Roku Inc. clarified a week later that the new EULA was not in relation to the aforementioned data breach.

== References ==
[https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/over-15-000-hacked-roku-accounts-sold-for-50-each-to-buy-hardware/ Over 15,000 hacked Roku accounts sold for 50¢ each to buy hardware] [https://web.archive.org/web/20240402093803/https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/over-15-000-hacked-roku-accounts-sold-for-50-each-to-buy-hardware/ <nowiki>[Archived]</nowiki>]

[https://www.claimdepot.com/data-breach/roku Roku Data Breach: Over 15,000 Accounts Affected]

[https://gizmodo.com/roku-smart-tv-streaming-arbitration-agreement-class-act-1851314150 Roku Will Bork Your TV Unless You Promise Not to Sue] [https://web.archive.org/web/20240307005654/https://gizmodo.com/roku-smart-tv-streaming-arbitration-agreement-class-act-1851314150 <nowiki>[Archived]</nowiki>]

[https://techcrunch.com/2024/03/05/roku-disables-tvs-and-streaming-devices-until-users-consent-to-forced-arbitration/ Roku disables TVs and streaming devices until users consent to new terms]

Arity's alleged unauthorized driver data collection through mobile apps

2025-01-17T00:39:59Z

JP: Fixed missing newline messing up formatting

{{ToneWarning}}

== Introduction ==
Arity is a subsidiary of Allstate founded in 2016. As part of their mission, Arity states they do the following:
<blockquote>''...collect{s} and analyze{s} trillions of miles of driving data to create a greater understanding of how people move. With the world's largest driving dataset tied to insurance claims collected through mobile devices, in-car devices, and vehicles themselves''<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20250114015047/https://arity.com/solutions/vehicle-miles-traveled/</ref></blockquote>

[[File:Screenshot of arity.com as of January 15, 2025.png|alt=screenshot of arity.com as of January 15, 2025|thumb|screenshot of arity.com demonstrating their claim of having 40 million active mobile connections]]

Their website touts over 40m active mobile connections, with data captured every 15 seconds or less.<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20241217184520/https://arity.com/solutions/real-time-insights/</ref> The state of Texas Attorney General's office claims this occurred without the consent of the drivers and has filed a lawsuit against Allstate Corporation and its subsidiaries, including Arity which was founded by Allstate.<ref>https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/press/Allstate%20and%20Arity%20Petition%20Filed.pdf</ref>

The State of Texas, led by Texas Attorney Ken Paxton, has named Allstate & Arity, as well as their subsidiaries, as defendants in a lawsuit where they make allegations of data privacy violations.

== Claims made by the suit ==

=== Laws broken ===
The lawsuit accuses them of violating state laws such as the Texas Data Privacy and Security Act<ref>https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/billtext/html/HB00004F.htm</ref>, the Data Broker Law<ref>https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/BC/htm/BC.509.htm</ref>, and the Texas Insurance Code<ref>https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/IN/htm/IN.541.htm</ref>. Allstate & its subsidiaries reportedly harvested this data through software integrated into mobile apps, impacting millions of Americans; not just those who are Texas residents.

=== Claims made ===
This lawsuit makes claims for which '''there is not enough information in the source document to understand where these came from.''' Refer to [[Anonymity & Vagueness in Citations]] to learn more.

==== Claims with evidence ====

===== What data Arity collects =====
Arity collects the following data per the lawsuit, that can be confirmed via their privacy policy<ref name=":0" />:

* Geolocation data
* Accelerometer data
* Magnetometer data
* Gyroscopic data
* Trip attributes:
** Start/end locations
** Distances
** Durations
** Times of these movements
* GPS points
* Derived events:
** Acceleration
** Speeding
** Distracted driving
** Crashes

===== Arity's claims regarding their massive data collection =====

====== This is technically true ======
The suit cites Arity's website, where they claim to:

# Have the largest collection of driving data
# Collect new data on individuals every 15 seconds
# Have access to trillions of miles of driving data.

====== Evidence of data collection vs. evidence of ''improper'' data collection ======
The lawsuit's citations are quotations from Arity's website, that in and of itself contain no evidence of malfeasance. For instance, Geico's smartphone application allows individuals to opt into driver-monitoring data collection offering a chance at decreased insurance rates, and is upfront about this before opting you in.<ref>https://www.geico.com/driveeasy/</ref> While this may not be comforting to privacy minded people, the choice is presented to the customer. The mere mention that a company collects driving data is not an indictment that privacy violations have occurred.

The allegations in the lawsuit hone in on the secretive collection & monetization of insured's private driving behavior data without proper disclosure or consent to the driver, but lack tangible evidence at this time that this has taken place.

===== Arity's lack of easy opt-out =====
{{Important|Even if a consumer of an application utilizing the Arity SDK wanted to opt out, there was no way for them to do so.}}
Their privacy policy<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20241217050443/https://arity.com/privacy/</ref> makes no meaningful mention of how to opt-out of data collection. Their website only occasionally links to outside websites that will be of little help to someone looking to limit Arity's data collection, such as the Apple support center.

===== Defendants worked to Integrate the Arity SDK into Mobile Apps =====
Ken Paxton's office, in this lawsuit, claim is made that Arity & Allstate paid partnered apps such as Routely, Life360, GasBuddy, and Fuel Rewards to integrate their SDK into the apps. The proof for this is not provided in the lawsuit documents. It can be inferred based on economic motives:

# There is a large market for driving data that businesses are willing to pay for.
# App developers have an incentive to receive money from other businesses.
# Arity has an incentive to provide their SDK that collects driving data, given the market for driver data.

Arity's website markets themselves to individuals & businesses that would want to utilize their driver data collection utilities within their applications, in a commercial tone.<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20240716070042/https://arity.com/article/leveraging-a-telematics-sdk-for-mobile-apps/</ref> That Arity was integrated into these mobile apps can be confirmed by case studies and PR statements made by Arity:

# Arity has claimed that GasBuddy partnered with Arity to collect personal data from drivers.<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20241213031839/https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/gasbuddy-partners-with-arity-to-bring-personalized-experiences-to-drivers-looking-to-save-even-more-money-on-fuel-301321800.html</ref>
# Arity has authored a case study regarding Life360's utilization of Arity's products.<ref>https://arity.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/arity_case-study_moapps_Life360.pdf</ref><ref>[[:File:Arity case-study moapps Life360.pdf]]</ref>

===== Arity's claims about usage of data =====
The lawsuit claims that Arity's terms of service provides information on how your data will be used, which is taken below from Arity's privacy policy<ref name=":0">https://web.archive.org/web/20241217050443/https://arity.com/privacy/</ref>:

<blockquote>Arity shares your information with its business clients as part of your purchase, or use, of services from those business clients. Those business clients include, but are not limited to, insurance companies as well as mobile app providers who track the location of members of a defined group or who provide weather related information. If you have purchased an insurance product offered by an Arity business client, then your information may also be used by that business client to calculate insurance rates or rewards provided under the product or service. Our insurance company business clients may also use your information to update their pricing and underwriting models. All such use of your personal information by our business clients is subject to their privacy policies and not this Privacy Statement.</blockquote>

===== Drivers not knowingly consenting to these terms =====
Arity's terms of service make the following claims, which customers have not consented to.

====== "Arity shares your information with its business clients as part of your purchase, or use, of services from those business clients."<ref name=":0" /> ======
This is troublesome as users who are having data collected by the Arity SDK might not be aware of or have consented to, such data sharing agreements. Imagine James is using an app that uses the Arity SDK:

# James is using an application developed by an Arity business client.
# James does not know who Arity is.
# The business client has not told James how Arity uses his data.
# Therefore, there is no way James could have consented to Arity's privacy policy.

====== "If you have purchased an insurance product offered by an Arity business client, then your information may also be used by that business client to calculate insurance rates or rewards provided under the product or service."<ref name=":0" /> ======
{{Important|Arity's business clients are not always insurance companies. '''This means that Arity is claiming that your insurance rates might be raised due to data collected by someone who is not your insurance company.'''}}

If the application a user is running on their phone does not disclose that the information they are collecting on them may raise their insurance rates, that means they are being materially harmed by terms of a privacy policy they were never made aware of. This can be referred to as a game of [[Game of Telephone privacy policy|telephone privacy policy]].

==== Claims without evidence ====
These claims are submitted without citations, or ''"on information and belief"'' - which is a way of saying that while the proof is not yet available, the attorney general expects to find it through the legal process of [[wikipedia:Discovery_(law)|discovery]].

{{Important|[[Trust me bro|trust me bro]] cannot be trusted as a source of information when making sweeping claims about nearly all major automotive manufacturers.}}

===== Arity purchased information from automakers to compliment their own data =====
[[File:Facebook screenshot of insurance app.png|alt=Facebook screenshot of insurance app|thumb|Facebook screenshot of insurance app]]
Arity's information collection was based on smartphone applications. Regardless of how accurate smartphone data collection is, this is an inaccurate way to judge the driving skills of an individual. For instance, if an individual is on a rollercoaster, they are not driving; but they may be judged as a poor driver for sudden turns and acceleration.<ref>https://www.cincinnati.com/story/entertainment/2024/10/08/insurance-cuts-driving-score-man-riding-the-beast-kings-island/75554987007/</ref><ref>https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=8578211025555918&set=gm.8485090164900182&idorvanity=121958981213384</ref>

However, no evidence is provided for sales of data from automakers to Arity.

<blockquote>To potentially account for the Arity SDK Data's limitations, Defendants sought to combine the SDK Data with data collected directly from vehicles. As a result, Defendants began purchasing consumers' driving-related data from car manufacturers, such as Toyota, Lexus, Mazda, Chrysler, Dodge, Fiat, Jeep, Maserati, and Ram. On information and belief, consumers did not consent, nor were otherwise aware that, Defendants purchased their driving-related data from these car manufacturers</blockquote>

===== Arity's bonus incentives to developers for bundling data collection into their apps =====
The suit claims <blockquote>"To encourage developers to adopt Defendants' software, Defendants paid app developers millions of dollars to integrate Defendants' software into their apps. Defendants further incentivized developer participation by creating generous bonus incentives for increasing the size of their dataset."</blockquote>However, no citations or evidence are provided.

{{Important| There is no evidence that Arity was paying developers to integrate their SDK into their apps present in this suit. One can infer economic incentives for Arity's alleged behavior; if driver data is in high demand, Arity could sell driver data to their partners for more money than the incentives offered to app developers to implement their data-collection-SDK. '''However, there is no evidence presented in the suit.'''}}

===== Automakers who sold data =====
The automakers that were accused of selling driver data to the defendant Arity were Toyota, Lexus, Mazda, Chrysler, Dodge, Fiat, Jeep, Maserati, and Ram; evidence was not presented for these.

== References ==
<references />

[[Category:Lawsuits]]
[[Category:Privacy]]
[[Category:Data Collection]]
[[Category:Allstate subsidiaries]]