Examine a Case: Software Failures

In 2016, NBA Golden State Warriors’ fan LaTisha Sarchell filed a federal lawsuit against the NBA team with the complaint that they, after downloading their official app on her phone, activated the device’s microphone and then recorded everything that was going on. The Warriors did this to enhance their merchandise and ticket upgrades. According to the lawsuit, the​ ​Golden State Warriors (Links to an external site.)​ worked together with technology company Signal360, who used beacon technology to track app users. The purpose of this tracking was to receive data about how they interact with marketing and advertising. It’s a very easy system. When a beacon is found on the app, it can send information to Signal360, but it can also bombard the user with personalized ads. The most unethical part of this is that the app actually activates the user’s microphone and then starts recording all audio which includes personal and consumer conversations. Even when the app is running in the background, it continues to record, without the user knowing this.

It is illegal in the United States for the federal government and individuals to record other people’s conversations without their consent. The​ Federal Wiretap Privacy Act (Links to an external site.)​is a federal law which has a goal to protect communications done privately. This law states that it is illegal to “intentionally or purposefully intercept, disclose or use any wire, oral, or electronic communication through the use of a device.” The Golden State Warriors recorded its app users illegally and broke the Wiretap Act. Violating the Wiretap Privacy Act can result in criminal punishments of up to 5 years in prison and a $250,000 fine for each time the Act has been violated. A judge ruled that the Wiretap Act didn’t apply here because Sarchell, who filed the lawsuit, could not show any intercepted communications. Instead of deleting the feature, the Warriors only updated the app’s user agreement so users know about the eavesdropping technology that is being used when the app is open.

It is astonishing that a judge would rule the evidence against the Warriors insufficient because the plaintiff couldn’t provide any recordings of recorded conversations. How could the plaintiff even provide this? This case should be quite damaging to people’s trust in apps. Internet and app users must be guaranteed privacy if internet companies want their customer’s trust, as discussed in the article “​Privacy is key to reinforcing user trust on the Internet (Links to an external site.)​.” Right now, consumers don’t have faith in these app owners that their private conversations aren’t listened to and recorded? If a judge rules in favor of the Warriors and the Warriors just have to update their privacy policies so it’s more clear that by agreeing to their terms, you also allow them to eavesdrop on private conversations, what is the point of the Wiretap Privacy Act? The scary part is that it isn’t just Warriors whose behavior is unethical. We know that many apps have the ability of recording conversations. Many times, people have talked about a specific topic over the phone, and when they later open Twitter or Facebook, they see ads about that topic. If no one was listening in, this wouldn’t happen. The article​ “Apple contractors 'regularly hear confidential details' on Siri recordings” (Links to an external site.) discusses how Apple listens in on conversations, sometimes very private ones, that are recorded by Siri. A whistleblower, who worked for Apple, was concerned about the lack of disclosure about these recordings. Even if it was fully disclosed, it is totally unethical to eavesdrop on people's private conversations. Why would anyone want this? Privacy and trust is

important to people, and both are thrown out of the window because of a lack of honesty by these app creators and internet companies.

The​ ​Utilitarianism Approach (Links to an external site.)​ means that people or companies will take in account costs and benefits when making decisions. These reason-based decisions are focused on getting the greatest good and do the least harm. However, it is hard to predict what the consequences are from decisions taken. In the case of the Golden State Warriors, this approach might suit them. The goal of recording conversations was to get the most data that would increase the sale of merchandise and tickets upgrades. They expected this action wouldn’t do too much harm to their fans. They might have been right about that because a huge number of fans tried to have the case against the Warriors dismissed. Apparently, most fans didn’t experience any harm from the Warriors unethical actions. Since the Utilitarianism Approach doesn’t provide for values such as individual rights, which in this case would be privacy, the approach is a good fit for the Warriors and their unethical app recording of their fans.