iCloud force us to agree to new terms to continue using it's service

[HDFan]

I note that Apple is making a contract with you (as clearly stated by them up front) to share your HEALTH DATA with 3rd parties.

The widely publicised Health app collects health data through the transparent process of ASKING YOU FOR IT. If you don't want that data shared with other widely publicised health-related apps and services then don't type it in and don't press the buttons that share it.

Also, you already know your device collects health data, because you are already using it for that purpose. The T&Cs just ensure that everyone understands that you are putting your health data on their services, because they are legally required to get your permission.

The health applications which I use all require me to authorize data useage by other applications, which in my case is the Health app. You have to authorize the collection of data from these applications in the Apple Health app as well. As for 3rd parties, such as your healthcare provider, this has to be explicitly authorized. The legal terms are there so these exchanges can happen.

I have not seen any reports of Apple sharing any Health data with 3rd parties which were not individually authorized. You have to balance the convenience of your health care or other provider being able to see all of your data versus any privacy issues. The latter might include:

1. Apple sharing data without your permission. Highly unlikely. Look at the uproar about CSAM, which is a very public discussion so no stealth involved here. If it is eventually implemented you will have been warned.

2. Loss of your phone by someone who is able to access all of its data.

The bottom line is if you don't want any vulnerability just don't keep your health data on your phone. Personally I don't worry about it as I trust Apple, although I am disturbed about CSAM.

 

[xolite]

You won’t find it different in any other legitimate cloud service. When the features change the agreement has to change. If you think there’s an unacceptable change in there why not quote it here to alert other readers. There’s a handy comparison on page 1 which only takes a minute to scan.

This is true, but the behaviour certainly is different on how it is presented. No one is saying anything in regards to new terms and conditions, our problem is AGREE or ELSE attitude taken here by Apple. As for many of us we have all agreed to apples terms and conditions in the past, many of us being loyal users for many years. I can assure you we understand.

 

[TiggrToo]

our problem is AGREE or ELSE attitude taken here by Apple

Don't kid yourself this is an Apple issue - this is bog standard across the entire industry.

 

[xolite]

oh I get that for sure, what I object to is them automatically doing an update, that locks me out out my photo's and docs. Then forcing me to click "ok" to a "You Must Comply" form to regain access to the date, I was having them protect for me. I see it as no different than if you put $5,000 in a bank, then the bank changes rules and says you can't have access to your money unless you comply to XYZ. Why do they get to change the rules with no warning? It's over reach and abusing me as their customer. Also, why is not everyone having to do this? None of my friends have gotten this notice. I got locked out of my cloud after copying a photo from f-book. Not posting a picture, but just copying an irony type cartoon of a handgun that was not identifying as a hand gun. YOU MUST COMPLY reeks of over reach.

Thus back to my question does anyone have a non apple phone they like

You are not wrong, this entire data/cloud/privacy thing is sold under the illusion we NEED companies like Apple, Google etc to PROTECT US and keep us and our illusion of data SAFE. We came from an era of devices made to enhance our experience to the new attitude, we make devices and services you cannot live with out once we have your data.

Someone already wrote, if you do not agree then do not use the cloud services. (or Apple Products for that matter) AGREED.

Don't kid yourself this is an Apple issue - this is bog standard across the entire industry.

Terms and Conditions and agreeing to them most certainly is prior to using any services for liability, no argument there, disabling your account UNTIL YOU agree to new one's or ELSE is not a standard or not yet lol.

 

[HDFan]

disabling your account UNTIL YOU agree to new one's or ELSE is not a standard or not yet lol.

True, normally you are asked to accept the legal terms before starting the use of a service. I understand why Apple denies access if you don't accept the new terms, but it is the first time I have heard of new terms requiring acceptance or you immediately lose access. Vaguely remember that happened with some existing credit cards, but there was a grace period.

 

[mw360]

True, normally you are asked to accept the legal terms before starting the use of a service. I understand why Apple denies access if you don't accept the new terms, but it is the first time I have heard of new terms requiring acceptance or you immediately lose access. Vaguely remember that happened with some existing credit cards, but there was a grace period.

It's not the first time I've encountered it but a common alternative is "these are our new terms and conditions going into effect on <date> by continuing to use the service beyond that date you accept the new terms of the agreement". The result is the same, in that you get no choice in the matter but at least they provide a notice period for you to bail out.

The T&Cs says Apple 'may' email notice of the changes but I don't see any email, and don't recall any other notice so actually yes, even though the changes are inoffensive and almost entirely in the user's favour, I agree this is unreasonable.

 

[TiggrToo]

You are not wrong, this entire data/cloud/privacy thing is sold under the illusion we NEED companies like Apple, Google etc to PROTECT US and keep us and our illusion of data SAFE. We came from an era of devices made to enhance our experience to the new attitude, we make devices and services you cannot live with out once we have your data.

Someone already wrote, if you do not agree then do not use the cloud services. (or Apple Products for that matter) AGREED.

Terms and Conditions and agreeing to them most certainly is prior to using any services for liability, no argument there, disabling your account UNTIL YOU agree to new one's or ELSE is not a standard or not yet lol.

It's another method of the same action. Many other places don't even warn you the Ts&Cs have changed and simply say "your continued use after this change confirms acceptance".

For example : Samsung

Terms and Conditions | Samsung Developer

The world runs on you.

developer.samsung.com

Listen, I'm not saying I agree with any of this: I think the entire practice is reprehensible at best - Apple included.

But in this case, at least they told you of the change - unlike other places.

 

[iHorseHead]

I agree with everything Apple throws at me.
What am I going to do? Return my devices?

 

[slyronit]

For all those privacy-warriors here who declined the terms, serves you right. I hope they eventually deactivate your whole accounts.

 

[Vlad Soare]

For all those privacy-warriors here who declined the terms, serves you right. I hope they eventually deactivate your whole accounts.

Why do you hope that? What's it to you if they do?

 

[Youngin]

Looks like this thread is becoming a breeding ground for bad takes from MR newbies. Bye thread!

Hilarious that you find your validation in how long you’ve had a MacRumors account ?

Been using iPhones since the 3g and reading MacRumors as long as I can remember. Might be a MacRumors account holder “newbie”, but am no stranger to Apple products.

Lol

That’s interesting that you rate humans based on length of time with a MacRumors account.

Keep doing you though ? ?

 

[Youngin]

For all those privacy-warriors here who declined the terms, serves you right. I hope they eventually deactivate your whole accounts.

Hangry?

 

[Nikkibee11]

I'm on iOS14, so this morning when i click into iCloud settings, it prompts me to agree to new terms. Anyone here getting the same prompt? Any idea what's the difference? Could it be related to CSAM as iOS15 release today?

If you read the terms&conditions, it stated they will share iCloud info with the govt in case of catastrophe event, natural disaster, or war…..war? I’m like oh okay Apple… what are you preparing for that we all don’t know.

 

[Nikkibee11]

C. Removal of Content

You acknowledge that Apple is not responsible or liable in any way for any Content provided by others and has no duty to screen such Content. However, Apple reserves the right at all times to determine whether Content is appropriate and in compliance with this Agreement, and may screen, move, refuse, modify and/or remove Content at any time, without prior notice and in its sole discretion, if such Content is found to be in violation of this Agreement or is otherwise objectionable.

Its this that worries me, can anyone explain this and if this is new? can they remove my content if they deem it objectionable? I dont do anything illegal but this world is so polarized anymore, who knows whats objectionable anymore

I absolutely agree. Who knows what will be “illegal” or problematic in the next year. Scary thought. The part of the agreement with iCloud+ scared the sh*t out of me when it referred to the whole “in case of catastrophe, natural disaster, or war the govt will have full access to iclouds” clause….like what? They know nobody takes the time to read the terms and click accept.

 

[mw360]

If you read the terms&conditions, it stated they will share iCloud info with the govt in case of catastrophe event, natural disaster, or war…..war? I’m like oh okay Apple… what are you preparing for that we all don’t know.

Why don't you quote the section that says this?

 

[VulchR]

Almost every service makes you agree to a book full of statements that would even bore a lawyer. You have to do the same for software apps. They know we likely won’t read all, or even any, of it. Hell we could be signing away our first born child for all we know!

Just married off my first kid. Feels like the same thing.

BTW, I think this CSAM panic is because people don’t ave a clue what it is all about. Get informed first, then make a decision. Don’t jump to conclusions until you understand what it actually will involve.

You are entitled to your opinion but many people who are experts, including EFF, object to the scheme.

Sure, all the new terms and conditions seem boring and innocuous until you get to a paragraph about who Apple can share iCloud data with. Strangely, there is a link, but it is not a blue hyper link. Which should make a sentient person suspect. You have to cut and past this link in a browser, despite there being blue hype links throughout the rest of the Terms. So following the link, I note that Apple is making a contract with you (as clearly stated by them up front) to share your HEALTH DATA with 3rd parties. For one, how is apple obtaining any health date on me except nefariously, and in the face of HIPPA violations. And secondly, why are they selling it?...

I believe this has to do with data via the Health app and with the collection of data from the Apple Watch. Apple has partnered with academic institutions to see if they can detect trends in health from the data (e.g., heart rate tends to increase before somebody becomes symptomatic with infection). Generally academics require specific informed consent about the particular study and not some blanket consent from a user license (as researchers from Facebook found out to their expense when they were soundly criticised for manipulating people's mood by their news feed on the basis of consent obtained from the FB user license). We do have to be alert for abuse about our data but we needn't be paranoid. OK, maybe just a little bit paranoid.

The new billboards are going up:
What happens on your iPhone, gets scanned on your iPhone.

LOL. But that's only half the story, the other half being potential review of your photos by a human being. In any case the best take I have heard about this comes from @BurgDog (see link). BurgDog asks if Apple does not want CSAM on its servers, why it can't do local scanning of photos and simply block downloading any ones to iCloud that are judged to be CSAM without alerting Apple, potentially having an Apple employee scan your private photos, etc. I would be OK with that.

 

[mw360]

LOL. But that's only half the story, the other half being potential review of your photos by a human being. In any case the best take I have heard about this comes from @BurgDog (see link). BurgDog asks if Apple does not want CSAM on its servers, why it can't do local scanning of photos and simply block downloading any ones to iCloud that are judged to be CSAM without alerting Apple, potentially having an Apple employee scan your private photos, etc. I would be OK with that.

The answer to BurgDog is that if the hash-match results are known to the user and the device, the criminals would have a workaround up and running before the weekend.

 

[VulchR]

The answer to BurgDog is that if the hash-match results are known to the user and the device, the criminals would have a workaround up and running before the weekend.

As opposed to criminals simply not using iCloud? Or criminals not using information from other sources to edit CSAM material to avoid detection? Apple's purpose should be not to host illegal content on their servers, not to try to catch criminals by using blanket surveillance on people most likely not to be criminals.

 

[mw360]

As opposed to criminals simply not using iCloud? Or criminals not using information from other sources to edit CSAM material to avoid detection? Apple's purpose should be not to host illegal content on their servers, not to try to catch criminals by using blanket surveillance on people most likely not to be criminals.

Your linked thread is probably the better place to discuss it, but getting the criminals to simply not use iCloud is pretty much the whole point.

 

[Vlad Soare]

If I were a paedophile I would zip those photos and would store them in the cloud as documents. Problem solved.
So much ado for nothing. What's it to Apple if some pictures of children make it into a photo library in the cloud? Having a photo in your library doesn't harm children. Those who do the actual harm to the children couldn't care less about where you're going to store their photos, and they or their business won't be in the least encumbered by Apple's CSAM filter. No child will actually be helped by this filter.

 

[posguy99]

All this hollering. I don't understand it myself. You put information on a system you do not control, why do you have any expectation of privacy from the provider of that service? Encrypt your sh*t or accept that random people can read your sh*t or don't use the service.

I suppose it's actionable if you have an SLA saying something otherwise, but I imagine any court would say the way to make you whole was to just stop using the service.

 

[Vlad Soare]

All this hollering. I don't understand it myself. You put information on a system you do not control, why do you have any expectation of privacy from the provider of that service? Encrypt your sh*t or accept that random people can read your sh*t or don't use the service.

I suppose it's actionable if you have an SLA saying something otherwise, but I imagine any court would say the way to make you whole was to just stop using the service.

The problem is that you've agreed to a set of rules, then uploaded your data into the cloud based on those rules. Now Apple is changing the rules and saying: "you must agree right now, on the spot, otherwise we won't let you connect to the cloud anymore - effective immediately".
If they want to change the rules, that's fine, they have the right to, but then they must give you a reasonable amount of time to retrieve your data from the cloud in case you don't agree with the new ones. But they don't. If you don't agree with the new rules, and you don't have a full local copy of your photo library (say, you've only got one iPhone, and it's set to optimized storage), then you're screwed. So you will have to agree, against your will, just so you can take your photos back. This isn't right.

 

[posguy99]

If they want to change the rules, that's fine, they have the right to, but then they must give you a reasonable amount of time to retrieve your data from the cloud in case you don't agree with the new ones. But they don't. If you don't agree with the new rules, and you don't have a full local copy of your photo library (say, you've only got one iPhone, and it's set to optimized storage), then you're screwed. So you will have to agree, against your will, just so you can take your photos back. This isn't right.

I wouldn't ever have had the expectation that there was any privacy, no matter what the the vendor said, but I understand that others might treat it differently.

I'd never bother with iCloud for anything I cared about in the first place, given Apple's services incompetence. But whether it's been Dropbox, or Box, or Google Drive, or OneDrive, then my expectation has always been that the vendor is reading whatever they like.

 

[Vlad Soare]

I'm not discussing whether the rules are reasonable or not, or if any privacy may be expected or not. I'm only discussing the agressive, bullying way in which Apple forces us to accept new rules, after having lured us into using their system based on old ones.

My grandfather once told me a story from his youth, from the thirties. Back then shoeshiners were very common around here, they were everywhere, at every street corner. Mostly children. One day, as he was wandering about, one of these kids started pestering him: "come on, chief, let me polish your shoes, it's cheap, just one franc, please, I will make them like new, I promise, please, just one franc"... My grandpa took pity on him. Besides, the price was right, and his shoes were admittedly in need of a bit of cleaning. So he said OK.
The little urchin cleaned and polished one shoe, then said: "the second one is ten francs". ?

That's what Apple is doing. Changing the rules during the game. Sure, we can leave the game if we don't like it, but that's not the point. Saying: "we shall change the rules for iCloud starting next month; if you do not agree, please download your data locally until then" would be OK. Saying: "we've changed the rules, and you must agree this very instant, otherwise you will not be allowed to connect to the iCloud anymore" is not OK.

 

[mw360]

I'm not discussing whether the rules are reasonable or not, or if any privacy may be expected or not. I'm only discussing the agressive, bullying way in which Apple forces us to accept new rules, after having lured us into using their system based on old ones.

My grandfather once told me a story from his youth, from the thirties. Back then shoeshiners were very common around here, they were everywhere, at every street corner. Mostly children. One day, as he was wandering about, one of these kids started pestering him: "come on, chief, let me polish your shoes, it's cheap, just one franc, please, I will make them like new, I promise, please, just one franc"... My grandpa took pity on him. Besides, the price was right, and his shoes were admittedly in need of a bit of cleaning. So he said OK.
The little urchin cleaned and polished one shoe, then said: "the second one is ten francs". ?

That's what Apple is doing. Changing the rules during the game. Sure, we can leave the game if we don't like it, but that's not the point. Saying: "we shall change the rules for iCloud starting next month; if you do not agree, please download your data locally until then" would be OK. Saying: "we've changed the rules, and you must agree this very instant, otherwise you will not be allowed to connect to the iCloud anymore" is not OK.

It’s useful to read what Apple say about this in the agreement. Bolding and underlines are mine. Would you say there are material adverse changes, or are you still going to refuse to discuss the changes themselves?

E. Changing the Service. Apple reserves the right at any time to modify this Agreement and to impose new or additional terms or conditions on your use of the Service, provided that Apple will give you 30 days’ advance notice of any material adverse change to the Service or applicable terms of service, unless it would not be reasonable to do so due to circumstances arising from legal, regulatory, or governmental action; to address user security, user privacy, or technical integrity concerns; to avoid service disruptions to other users; or due to a natural disaster, catastrophic event, war, or other similar occurrence outside of Apple’s reasonable control. With respect to paid iCloud services, e.g. iCloud+ as defined below, Apple will not make any material adverse change to the Service before the end of your current paid term, unless a change is reasonably necessary to address legal, regulatory, or governmental action; to address user security, user privacy, or technical integrity concerns; to avoid service disruptions to other users; or to avoid issues resulting from a natural disaster, a catastrophic event, war, or other similar occurrence outside of Apple’s reasonable control. In the event that Apple does make material adverse changes to the Service or terms of use, you will have the right to terminate this Agreement and your account, in which case Apple will provide you with a pro rata refund of any pre-payment for your then-current paid term. Apple shall not be liable to you for any modifications to the Service or terms of service made in accordance with this Section IE.