Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Vlad Soare

macrumors 6502a
Mar 23, 2019
675
652
Bucharest, Romania
Would you say there are material adverse changes, or are you still going to refuse to discuss the changes themselves?
That depends on what you consider adverse. Or how much adversity you're willing to accept.

Screenshot 2021-11-06 at 08.25.35.png
Maybe I don't want my data do be shared with third parties.

Screenshot 2021-11-06 at 08.34.45.png
Prescreening is most probably meant as scanning on my phone, as opposed to scanning in their cloud. Maybe I don't want to allow this.

Sure, you can argue that these changes are minor, that they're not "adverse", that they won't affect me, that I'm being paranoid, etc. But that's not the point. Even if I'm paranoid, I must still be given a reasonable amount of time to put my things in order before being locked out of the service. They can't just furtively add new words into the agreement and hope that people won't notice and will blindly accept everything without reading (and if they do read it, they will be locked out of the account right there and then unless they agree).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dhtmlkitchen

mw360

macrumors 68020
Aug 15, 2010
2,070
2,477
That depends on what you consider adverse. Or how much adversity you're willing to accept.

View attachment 1903869
Maybe I don't want my data do be shared with third parties.

View attachment 1903870
Prescreening is most probably meant as scanning on my phone, as opposed to scanning in their cloud. Maybe I don't want to allow this.

Sure, you can argue that these changes are minor, that they're not "adverse", that they won't affect me, that I'm being paranoid, etc. But that's not the point. Even if I'm paranoid, I must still be given a reasonable amount of time to put my things in order before being locked out of the service. They can't just furtively add new words into the agreement and hope that people won't notice and will blindly accept everything without reading (and if they do read it, they will be locked out of the account right there and then unless they agree).
Thank you for looking though. Yes, those are the two interesting ones but the prescreen paragraph was already in the 2019 version. The whole paragraph is now in the agreement twice, which is why it appears in the diffchecker. The only change is from ‘screen’ to ‘prescreen’ which I don’t think changes the meaning adversely. If anything it’s narrowing the scope of the clause to exclude server-side scanning. Which is very interesting if true. What do you think?

The business with storing data on 3rd party servers seems to have changed in response to it becoming known that Apple were using AWS and Google for storage. The 2019 version doesn’t say they don’t use 3rd party servers, which is probably deliberate because before this change they certainly were. Nevertheless there was a lot of reporting on it at the time, and knowledgeable people insist that the data is stored in such a way that it’s unreadable to the host service, which seems like a very obvious and easy precaution. So when you say your data is ‘shared’ that is very misleading I would say.

If you’re still angry about the changes, and the process that’s fine, but this is all you’re angry about, a possibly redundant extra prefix on one word, and a clarification of something that the original agreement was evading. The agreement does say if the terms change adversely you are entitled to a pro-rata refund. It would be interesting to see one of the boycotters try it, to see if Apple refuses and what interpretation they offer for those two changes.
 

Vlad Soare

macrumors 6502a
Mar 23, 2019
675
652
Bucharest, Romania
I do sometimes tend to use language that may sound a bit harsh and uncompromising, which is probably why I gave you the impression that I'm angry about the changes. I'm not. I've accepted the new terms without even reading them, because I want to continue using the service.
All I'm saying is that, the changes themselves notwithstanding, I find Apple's attitude of "you must agree, or else" a bit too bullying for my taste.
 

2muchcoffeeman

macrumors newbie
Sep 18, 2018
9
8
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
Third parties like your doctor. Apple is obtaining that data via the Health append (if you have one) your Apple Watch. If you’re not using that app or don’t have an Apple Watch, what are you prattling on about?
 

posguy99

macrumors 68020
Nov 3, 2004
2,291
1,531
It would be interesting to see one of the boycotters try it, to see if Apple refuses and what interpretation they offer for those two changes.
I hope you're not lumping me in with the boycotters. I have real problems getting past the Apple-is-services-incompetent part to whether their terms are something someone might accept. So it's not like I don't use iCloud because of their terms, I don't use it because Apple can't be trusted to provide the service.
 

mackennaa

macrumors newbie
Nov 14, 2021
3
0
It's all well and good to be informed about these things, but right now there's not a whole lot to go on with this one.

Myself and gistme have already asked Strumpet to provide the actual URL they found to have a look at it, but so far they've failed to produce the URL. This despite MR rules specifically stating that sources must be provided when requested:

"If you can't produce evidence when someone asks you to cite your sources, we may remove your posts."

Searching for "http", "www", "/" and "apple.com" in the iCloud T&C document reveals no non-hyperlinked URLs either. Though possible, it's highly unlikely that one would exist without at least one of these.

Basically... can't verify, need more info.
i mean, none of the links on the agreement are hyperlinked if you're reading it on mobile agreement
 
Last edited:

Yuck9

macrumors member
Dec 9, 2014
87
39
California
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! :p

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.
Problem is the lie that Apple continues to push. That private scanning can be used for other things. CSAM now, More down the line. Turn off iCloud and be free. Timmy is one bold face liar.
 

Sheepish-Lord

macrumors 68030
Oct 13, 2021
2,532
5,149
Y'all are insane. Complaining about privacy concerns but are constantly using/walking around with technology that literally tracks your location whether you know it or not. If it's not your device it's the cell phone towers. If it's not the cell towers, its your ISP...there's always a way to find you.

Stop pretending to be a privacy warrior with a Google lawyer degree acting like terms and conditions are a new thing. Setting yourself "free" of iCloud does nothing but cause delusional threads like this while you use Facebook, TikTok, etc that are just as bad.
 

dhtmlkitchen

macrumors member
Dec 23, 2010
34
0
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?
Strong arm tactics from Apple. User-hostile. They did it to me, too, while I was on vacation.

They shut off my Mail, Find My Phone — everything.

When I called to ask what was in the new terms, the representative told me that I needed to click "I Agree". When I pressed what I was agreeing to, they said I could read it myself. I asked them if they had read them or if they could summarize the changes. After several hours of talking to "senior advisors", nobody was able to give me any indication of what was new in the new Terms, but that I could read them myself if I wanted to.

Apple is saying that they'll shut your service off because they know they won't lose market share. Like what, will a few users do, switch to Android? Over what? Privacy? Pffft. Apple isn't worried about it.

So, after I got back from my trip, after taking care of more pressing issues, I finally got to read some of it.

These terms are terrible. If Apple suspects your content may violate its terms, such as by being "objectionable", they can ransack all of your content and share it with LE.

It looks like Apple uses third party services, though it's unclear, if they do, or what those third-parties' terms are.

V. Content and Your Conduct

You agree that you will NOT use the Service to:

B. a. upload, download, post, email, transmit, store or otherwise make available any Content that is unlawful, harassing, threatening, harmful, tortious, defamatory, libelous, abusive, violent, obscene, vulgar, invasive of another’s privacy, hateful, racially or ethnically offensive, or otherwise objectionable;
"otherwise objectionable"? What the hell is that?


E. Access to Account and Content


Apple reserves the right to take steps Apple believes are reasonably necessary or appropriate to enforce and/or verify compliance with any part of this Agreement. You acknowledge and agree that Apple may, without liability to you, access, use, preserve and/or disclose your Account information and any Content to law enforcement authorities, government officials, and/or a third party, as Apple believes is reasonably necessary or appropriate, if legally required to do so or if Apple has a good faith belief that such access, use, disclosure, or preservation is reasonably necessary to: (a) comply with legal process or request; (b) enforce this Agreement, including investigation of any potential violation thereof; (c) detect, prevent or otherwise address security, fraud or technical issues; or (d) protect the rights, property or safety of Apple, its users, a third party, or the public as required or permitted by law

I bought an unlocked phone so I could own it. Since all the services are moved to iCloud, it feels like Apple owns my phone. I tried to find a third party cloud service that offers privacy and covers apps like Calendar, Find My, and Mail, but found nothing.

Where can I find a privacy phone that *I* own? Where can I find a third-party cloud service that integrates with it?

I neither want nor condone snooping of my data, algorithmically or otherwise, by Apple, its minions, or any company or entity. I want a private phone that is mine, where I own my data and I choose what I share and with whom.

What options do we have for privacy phones and third-party cloud services that integrate with them?
 

dhtmlkitchen

macrumors member
Dec 23, 2010
34
0
They can't just furtively add new words into the agreement and hope that people won't notice and will blindly accept everything without reading (and if they do read it, they will be locked out of the account right there and then unless they agree).

Actually, they can do that. They already did it.
 

dhtmlkitchen

macrumors member
Dec 23, 2010
34
0
Y'all are insane. Complaining about privacy concerns but are constantly using/walking around with technology that literally tracks your location whether you know it or not. If it's not your device it's the cell phone towers. If it's not the cell towers, its your ISP...there's always a way to find you.

Stop pretending to be a privacy warrior with a Google lawyer degree acting like terms and conditions are a new thing. Setting yourself "free" of iCloud does nothing but cause delusional threads like this while you use Facebook, TikTok, etc that are just as bad.

You raise a valid point about the phone itself being trackable, and Ed Snowden sacrificed his life in America to expose that back in 2013, and has revealed that there are backdoors to turn on the camera and mic without notify9ing the user.

Cell phones are tracking devices.

Not everything on the phone has access to all of the data, and that's why sandboxing offers some value, but advertisement companies, or "AdTech" aggregates a lot more than you'd like to share.

The device manufacturer can take measures to protect privacy and limit tracking.

Brave Browser has done a good job at fighting back against the adtech.

But Facebook, or "Meta", and many other services are increasingly more essential to modern daily life. It's not nice to call people "insane" for their privacy concerns and then pointing to Facebook as being worse. Sure, Facebook is worse and it sucks, and that's another battle that I would like to see favoring the consumer with more protections for user rights, that is, against censorship and for user privacy, but Facebook and other providers' lack of privacy should not give Apple a free pass. Facebook being gross does not make it OK for Apple to force users to click "I Agree", else be locked out of Find My — that's on Apple and those bad apples are Apple's bad.

It is possible to somewhat manage the lens facebook can view you under. Keep Facebook to one browser only. Use Facebook in only one browser and in that browser, use nothing else. Don't start reading news or clicking around.
 

macsrwe

macrumors newbie
Jan 24, 2006
14
1
Arizona
This post has revealed more of your health data than iCloud collects. Get back on the pills. 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.
Provably not true. Some time back, I found that my iPhone's Health app had been tracking my daily step count since who knows when, despite the fact that I had never authorized this and never even opened the app. How it may or may not get shared is not transparent to me, any more than my iPhone storing and sharing my geolocation some years back. So you get off the Kool-Aid.
 

macsrwe

macrumors newbie
Jan 24, 2006
14
1
Arizona
If you are interested in the changes, I've made this comparison in diffchecker at the link below (from Sept 2019). Note that I had to re-order the new terms to get them to line up better (but I kept the original letters/numerals)

Thank you, this service was extremely helpful.
My only question is, can you clarify what are the two versions of the TOS being compared?
I came here looking to find out what was new/changed in the Ventura TOS that I was told I had to accept today after being forced to upgrade to Ventura (today's Monterey update bricked my machine pretty hard). Usually I can find a posting somewhere on the net that explains the changes in brief, but apparently the entire net is polluted with posts about a Ventura bug that required people to accept the TOS every time they rebooted, and they swamped everything else.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.