TiVo Usage Info Collected For Sale

therevan writes: "Headline News reports here that TiVo, the digital television recording technology, has been accused by privacy groups of selling user usage info to advertising agencies. Now you're not even safe with your computer unplugged." Though no specific sale is talked about, the article says that TiVO has acknowleged creating an (anonymized) database of viewing information for that purpose. It's not the first time that privacy concerns about TiVO viewing habits have been raised, but the company insist that all such information is separated from personally identifying information.

Re:800# opt-out

According to the article on MSNBC concerning this, TiVo claims that there is an 800# subscribers can call to have all data, even anonymous data, removed from their database and have no further data taken. Anyone know what this # is?

Chapter 7 "Privacy and Service" starts on page 71 of my manual, page 73 lists the "1-877-FOR-TIVO (1-877-367-8486)" number as the one to call to review the data TiVo has sent, or to have it all deleted and your TiVo to not send more.

It defanalty isn't hidden. The print isn't even any smaller then the rest of the plain text in the manual.

This surprises you???

I would imagine much of TiVo was designed with this capability ultimately in mind. I wouldn't mind getting the service for a discount if I consented to my viewing habits being sold, or for free if they actually attached my name to it.

Re:the latest 2.0 update and wasted disk space

No, the hours are taken from people who have increased their recording time beyond a certain limit, whether by increasing the A or B drive size. A Tivo purchased with 60 hours is "really" a 72 hour Tivo with 12 hours reserved, so when 2.0 gets installed on a hacked 96 hour Tivo it notices that it isn't reserving 12 hours, so it grabs them and turns the Tivo into an 84 hour Tivo. The max number of hours it takes is 12, but the amount scales down with smaller sized units. If you haven't hacked your Tivo, it won't take any time from you.

They have not specified what the extra hours are for, but I am pretty convinced it is for some type of targetted ads. 12 hours could never be filled over the phone line, so it has to be something sucked down from the airwaves, which is either pay-per-view or targeted ads, and ads seems more realistic.

Tivo has been told, and I hope they understand, that the users won't mind targetted ads as long as they in no way impact our viewing, as soon as we are forced to watch ads then all "well behaved" hacking stops, and we all learn how to hack the guide data and cancel our subscriptions.

Good for TiVo

I've got a TiVo and one can only HOPE that they are selling my usage information. They will see that I never ever watch "The Golden Girls" but I do watch "Babylon 5". Maybe the networks will get a clue.

Re:the latest 2.0 update and wasted disk space

The "stolen" hours you refer to are a bogeyman of the 2.0 upgrade that's been blown way out of proportion.

What TiVo SAID was that uses who have upgraded their A drive (not the B drive) will lose a portion of the space when they get 2.0 due to the way they did it. They were just giving people some fair warning.

Since upgrading the A drive is really difficult, I doubt this will affect many people.

The Problem with Tivo Selling Data

The biggest problem with Tivo selling the data is that the television networks are going to figure out that Tivo users never watch commercials! I watch almost nothing in real-time and always skip the commercials. It's great, but not what television executives want to hear. There was a piece on 60 minutes recently about PVRs. This was one of their main points, if people don't watch ads then they lose the revenue to sustain the shows. They suggested in-program product placements (the hero holds up a pepsi) and pay-per-view for normal TV as alternatives. They are expecting PVRs to be the biggest commercial electonics product launch in history. (faster then CDs, DVDs, etc) We're already seeing the problems web sites are having with being advertiser driven. The only thing stopping people from doing that with TV was that it was difficult. Now PVRs make it really easy. It'l be interesting to see how it works out.

And?

How does this hurt me? Nobody got my name. Nobody got my phone number. I lost nothing. My privacy wasn't even invaded, because all they know is that some people like watching certain shows in certain proportions.

I really don't see the problem. I want them to know what shows I watch. That way they might make more of them.
_____

So what?

We (the TiVo using community) knew they were collecting anonymous information. What did you *think* they were going to use it for? TiVo has also gone out of their way to make sure you can opt out as well.

If it makes my television viewing better, then I'm all for *anonymous* tracking.

FP

Re:it IS anonymous

And interestingly enough, his first two (out of three) points are:

According to our findings, TiVo:

gathers enough information to track individual users' home viewing habits while apparently promising not to do so;

could identify the personal viewing habits of subscribers at will;

That's not what you said before. Well, actually it is what you said before, but with different interpretation, perhaps.

Re:So what?

Huh?

That looks backwards to me, Bob.

If they can push fine-grained data on who views what (and this has to be the best way to get it) from a group who care enough about TV, probably fringe, to buy a TiVo, then they would seem likely to INCREASE support for marginal TV.

Firstly, you can see that people are watching these programs. Secondly, you can see that they're watching linked groups. Thirdly, you may well be able to see _how_ they're viewing it - say timeshifting from the night before, for example.

Whereas with traditional ratings info you can't really see much more than the rough popularity of the top programs. More than that is a problem, simply as you can't get the _precision_. You might be able to identify with some certainty that a program had tens of thousands of viewers, but that's still pretty lucky. Hundreds of thousands and you're getting safer. Think about sample sets here.

OK, so identifying that a program was only watched by 40,000 people might not be fantastic - BUT it's an improvement on knowing that less than 250,000 watched it, especially in combination with the other information. Also, remember that people are commisioning this show in the knowledge that almost no-one will watch it. If you can confirm that slightly more than no-one watches it with some likelihood, you boost the chances for that sort of program.

What makes me think TiVos are probably bought by people on the fringes of normal TV viewing? Think about it. If you only watch soaps and gameshows, what's the benefit? Soaps are on very regularly, often with weekly omnibus editions. And missing one isn't the end of the world. And gameshows, well, really don't matter much from week to wek plus there's a lot which are really pretty similar.

Using me as an example, though, a device to make sure I never miss American Gothic, B5 or The Outer Limits - all shown late or in intermittent slots at various points, all on the margins of the viewer figures - would be a big attraction as it's not anywhere near as easy to keep up with them and it would be useful to be able to guarantee I could keep up, no matter what they did with the schedules. It makes far more sense for me than the stereotypical soap viewer.

Re:So what?

My point on the granularity was simply that, when coarse-grained data is collected on pretty much anything, it underrepresents the margins. In these terms, the current system underrates a large chunk of what Slashdot's users seems to like. You may well want some of the near zero audience shows (as do I) but this can't really harm them, as it allows them to be represented at all. When you're sampling 1000 to extrapolate the results onto 200 million, they _WILL_ get missed. Also, the more you can find out about their audiences, the better you can target the marketing and trailing they run. Better targetted marketing will produce higher ad revenues (good) while better trailing increases the chance of people actually coming across these shows, as thet can stick the trailers in the right places. Both help the long-term survival of the shows.

My point about usage patterns wasn't meant to be referring to its 1337ness or similar, actually. Simply that it's of far more use to people who tend to watch marginal interest shows. Not just SF and fantasty - if you really, really like old westerns, for example, this'll search them out on the schedules so not only increase their viewing figures but actually make them measurable. Or if I'm a fan of original short films - shown periodically in the small hours, I'd have to really watch out without a TiVo or similar. It can benefit pretty much any TV viewer, but its benefit seems greatest to viewers of marginal interest shows - such as SF, Fantasy, Horror and Anime.

This can be of huge benefit to the marginal interest shows, and help their viability no end. Which, even if only a little, takes money away from another Temptation Island or generic soap. Part of why they're so successful is that they're an easy brand - they're clear, solid and large so no problems to sell to the ad people. It's a no-brainer to advertise on them, so the networks like them, so they push them and create more - which gets circular and only really leads to dumbing down. Now - and I admit this is optimistic - if you can demonstrate that a package of 15 cult shows has just as strong demographics when taken as a package, but has half the ad cost, where does the money go? That isn't viable without this sort of fine-grained data, but can be with it.

Sadly, as has been pointed out before, TiVo etc largely cripple the conventional advertising funded TV concept... Bit irritating that the one thing which could save it from its excesses and return it to quality should be the thing which kills it. Oh well, good old UK and BBC :)

I admit I haven't heard of the Mosaic project though I'd be interested to see. If that's the result, though, I'd have to say it was spectacularly poorly executed. That's dreadful surveying, misuse of statistics and some pretty poor retailing, too.

Speaking from firsthand experience it's not sensible. I live near a relatively large council-style estate (no idea on management) and sometimes use its convenience stores. They have a massive product range and seem to have a pretty good stockturn. Judging from their numbers and condition I'd have to say they're doing excellent business.

This is NOTHING ground breaking...

This information is not secret, and in fact is well documented. It is even freely discussed in the AVS TiVo Forums. As a matter of fact, here is exactly what is sent out to TiVo headquarters, as reported by moderator Otto:

For the record, the Tivo sends back two files.

The first one is a debug logfile for the software. It contains the serial number, a bunch of good identifying info, but no viewing data or remote keypresses or anything like that.

The second file contains *only* viewing info and remote keypresses. It is time-stamped, but it has no serial number.

They are both sent back to an FTP server (in 1.3) or an HTTP server (in 2.0). The command to send them back in 2.0 includes the serial in the debug file send request, but not in the anonymous viewing data request. While it would be possible to sync them via http logfiles, it's not worth the trouble.

Face it, your individual viewing data is WORTHLESS. You're just not that important of a person. Viewing data is only worthwhile as an aggregate, despite what everyone seems to think.

Your viewing data combined with 150,000 other people's viewing data, sorted by region (zipcode is included), might have some value to it after all. Nobody cares that you watch ER, but they might care that Everybody in your zipcode watches ER. Or that everybody in your zipcode doesn't watch ER. They might try to increase advertising in that region because it does so poorly there. Or some other such thing. This is not an invasion of your privacy.

...

One more thing, while the data was sent unencrypted in 1.3, it definitely is encrypted in 2.0. Ever notice that the lights on the front of the tivo blink a few times just before the call? That's the Tivo accessing the crypto chip to encrypt the anonymous information and the debugging log.

So you need not worry about the dark black circle in the middle of your TiVo glowing red or the machine referring to you as "Dave". It's all just anonymous viewing data harvested by area, and has no ties with you whatsoever. For more info on this sort of thing, go do a search over at the AVS TiVo Forum [avsforum.com].

Oh yeah, and STOP BEING SO PARANOID!!! :)

Re:So what?

Obviously, TV is all about advertising, and not all advertisers are targeting the lowest common denominator. Often these days you can tell what kind of show, or even exactly which show, will be coming on after the commercials judging by the commercials themselves.

Luxury car companies aren't after the lowest common denominator. Software companies aren't after the LCD either. If certain shows can give better information about their viewing audience, then they'll have a better chance of survival.

Look at Seinfeld -- the first couple of seasons noone watched, and it would have been cancelled except for one reason -- its target market was *exactly* what the advertisers in that timeslot were after.

Of course, I don't fully understand why any of this info is really relevant when it comes to Tivo... Basically, if you've got Tivo, why would you watch the ads?

TiVo has been up front about this

This sounds like a bunch of chicken little nonsense by an organization looking to leverage TiVo's popularity for some publicity.

I own a TiVo and the documentation and onscreen setup information made clear from the start that aggregate info will be released to outside parties unless you opt-out. In the article, The Privacy Foundation takes issue with the statement that "no one outside your home, not even the TiVo staff or any of TiVo's computer systems, will ever have access to any of your personal viewing information without your prior consent. Your preferences are personal." This is completely true. I am a twenty eight year old male and my viewing habits are only being used to make generalizations about people in my demographic.

I have real concerns about the way corporations are treating privacy, especially when they exchange information without consent, but TiVo has behaved admirably with respect to this issue, and I have been very satisfied with their service.

Re:So what?

It depends if you consider the following data "personally identifying information."

Anonymous Coward turns on his TV around 5:15 every weekday evening. He then watches the cooking channel for about 45 minutes, then turns his TV off.
On Tuesday, he watches ABC religiously from 6 to 9 PM.
Also, he watches the Cartoon Network every Sunday morning from 3 AM to 4 AM.
(add a few more tidbits, possibly some demographic information such as age and gender to clinch it).

Now, I realize that this information is still not linked to your name, but when you consider that various companies (*cough* DoubleClick *cough*) probably have enough information on you to know many of your habits already, it wouldn't be terribly hard to say that down the road, that information could be linked to "real" personal information, such as your name.

~=Keelor

Re:it IS anonymous

So i JUST got an e-mail from my professor, and he wrote up his experiences with the TiVo check it out right here [209.107.53.161] check it out.

it IS anonymous

My professor works for a privacy center [du.edu] at my school and one of the things he has looked into was a tivo. In my security class he explained to us how he went about figuring out what kind of information the tivo uploaded to it's servers. The thing calls home in the early morning and usualy transfers about 5 megs of data. He ended up setting up around $500 worth of equipment to get this stuff to work. The tivo was setup so that it's outgoing phone system was hooked up to his laptop, in one modem, and in another modem his laptop was hooked up to the phone jack. With a couple more peices of equipment and some simple programming he did a man-in-the-middle attack with the connection. When the tivo dialed it's home server the laptop listened to the number and then built a PPP connection to the server using the other modem. As the traffic flowed through each of the connections it was logged in a file. Afterwards, with a few unix tools, we converted the PPP data into tcp output, then the TCP output into raw data with time logs. As it turns out the tivo really does send *anonymous* data. In their privacy statement they say that they seperate your "personally identifiable data" from the "anonymous" data. The logs just showed when you changed the channel and when you started and stopped recording. The system also checked for updates for it's system, and downloaded a channel listing. However, it did tell the server it's serial number, and the ISP it used to login to the server was a local one. So if they REALLY needed to i bet they could track you down and match your records to your viewing habits. But really people, they are telling the truth they don't track you.

Yup, tivo confirms that I am whipped...

They will notice that for every hour of Sopranos and NHL hockey that I watch there is 5 hours of Dawson's Creek, Sex and the City, and ER.

Yup, this anonymous tivo user is remote-whipped. :)

info already in the user's manual

I thought the user's manual clearly states that this information is collected anonymously and then gives opt out procedures.

Besides, I don't have anything against being able to tell the networks which shows suck and which ones are good.

MegaDittos! MetaDittos! Wah wah wah!

Well, here's a newsflash: it's not surprising because TIVO has said for the past two years that they've been doing this.

It's no mystery, never has been a mystery, and is only a mystery to those odd privacy foundation folks who -- after two years of TIVO -- suddenly cracked open their TIVO manual and read that, yes indeed, TIVO collects and aggregates usage statistics.

I love it when "foundations" underwrite studies in order to garner publicity. Their so-called "studies" -- or press releases, whatever you want to call them -- always ride the crest of this week's current "hysterical trend."

The question we should be asking -- and no, I haven't checked their web page yet -- is who, exactly, is this foundation? What corporation has them in their pocket? (They wouldn't be involved with Microsoft, would they? I mean, MS would love to indirectly spread TIVO FUD -- indirectly, you'll notice I say -- because their oft-delayed Ultimate TV will very shortly make its way into pipelines.)

Maybe they aren't affiliated with MS at all, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit. Likewise, it wouldn't surprise me if this place gets funding from the core foundations of the American "right" -- the NRA, the various Christian fundamentalist groups, or whatever non-profit "moral authority" is the flavor of the day.

("Hey, video games are what causes the school shootings! And, TIVO, by god, it's on a video screen -- and it sorta plays like a game -- so you bet, we don't like TIVO either. It's just proof that the private button presses of our gun-carrying members are used to further the left's 'liberal' agenda!" "MegaDittos, Rush! MegaDitto's to you from Spokane!" "MegaDittos from Newport News! MetaDittos from New Mexico!" "All hail Mom, Apple Pie, shotguns, and Rush Limbaugh! Because, as you know, this country was founded on freedom: the freedom to carry guns, blow shit up, and read the bible!")

Re:MegaDittos! MetaDittos! Wah wah wah!

Aha! Here's the link: Peter Barton, head of this wonky privacy foundation, was the former head of Liberty Media in which *GemStar* had a 21% stake. (Liberty Media also has their hands on a multitude of cable channels most of which, I'd bet, would *love* to see TIVO take a crash dive.) But Gemstar: that's the kicker. Gemstar, you'll remember, claimed that they have the patents on *all* onscreen guides and for the past few years has sued nearly everyone who implemented an "on-screen" guide in one form or another. They have a long-running suit with TIVO which does not look it will be settled quietly. All you patent-busters: GEMSTAR ought to be a target on the radar.)

Anyway, here's the link (as provided by one of the stories below):

http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151, 18919,00.html [thestandard.com]

And here's the link to Liberty Media:

http://www.thestandard.com/companies/display/0,206 3,51395,00.html [thestandard.com]

And, yes, I see that Barton's foundation "shills for no corporate interest," but if you believe that, I've got a bridge I'll sell ya, real cheap. It's not possible these days to claim that you "shill for no corporate interest." Take away the corporations and what's left? Well, America's Christian right, of course. :) (LOL -- just kidding. Well, not really. The fundamentalists are as manipulative as the corporate stooges.)

Now, maybe Barton is really good guy and grew to, ya know (wink wink), "despise the role of corporations in the current media" and that's why he "had to go it alone and start up the privacy foundation." (I'm making these quotes up, but they sound like something a former corporate talking head might say in order to funnel donations and startup capital into his new -- and, of course! -- morally "just" enterprise. "Dammit, Jim, privacy is key! All our children will be destroyed! I must do something about it! I must take my, er, platinum parachute from this evil corporation and, um, do something for the common good! Now, um, where is that common good? Who do I talk to?")

I'm no journalist. Just an angry critic of media -- and corporate -- manipulation.

Impressive ..

.. how some good PR and a good product can turn some of the most privacy-sensitive people in the world into gullible idiots. It's the same effect that causes smokers to argue that smoking doesn't cause cancer. TiVo explicitly states in their privacy policy that

any information that may be considered "personal," such as the recorder's serial number, is severed from anonymous data such as your recorder's diagnostics,

once it arrives at TiVo.

[...]

The insinuation that TiVo "could" correlate both sets of information is inflammatory and contradicts TiVo's actual practices.

They know what buttons you press, they now which shows you watch. They can even statistically correlate when you're in the house and when you aren't. The broader the spectrum of TV channels you can receive, the more sense it makes to correlate this information to your identity.

You just have to trust TiVo, a corporation like any other, that they won't send this data to spammers & junk mailers including your identity -- a risk which is especially big if they go bankrupt, which will probably the case one day.

You have to trust them that they don't tell your boss that you watch softporn or an unreasonable amount of children's TV ("pedophile!"). You have to trust them that they don't tell your insurance company that you watch a lot of health information, especially about heart risks. You have to trust them that they don't tell the gov't that you watch only political documentaries and are especially interested in JFK.

Go on, trust TiVo. They're you friends. (Or at least they've got a good PR department that makes you think so.) Everyone else is just a conspiracy theorist and a fanatic.

While you're at it, enable the viewer reporting information in Real Player. Install Comet Cursor. Get webHancer. Get Aureate. Get Cydoor. All these advertisers just want to improve your web experience. And if you ask, they'll certainly tell you that they store all identifying information separately from everything else and would never correlate them together. What are you waiting for? This data is completely WORTHLESS, after all, right?

--

They said the info is *separated*

It probably means that they need to do a SQL join to associate viewing habits to a particular customer.

Cheers,

--fred

Stolen my ass...

First of all, this is pure speculation, TiVo had said publicly that they will NOT be doing this - the space is for Video On Demand PPV stuff. Imagine your TiVo knows you love Natalie Portman movies, well the next time one is available on PPV, TiVo will store it for you (locked up) and allow you to watch it on demand for a fee. It's basically time-shifted PPV movies.
Second, there is no 'stolen' disk space... All TiVos have space reserved on them from the factory, the higher the capacity of the machine, the more space there is. The only change is that with the 2.0 upgrade, people who hacked their TiVos had their reserve space adjusted to reflect the higher capacity of the box. Considering that TiVo has been very tolerant (even helpful at times) of people hacking their boxes, and this only happens to hacked boxes, and TiVo has been warning people about this for ages, I would find it very hard to use a strong term like 'stolen'.

Re:So what?

And anyone who thinks that companies aren't pooling their data and cross-checking it needs to reconsider.

Whenever I have to fill out a web form and I don't want to use my real info, I use "Dr. Nick Riviera", "123 Main St", "Anytown, IA".

I have received at least 20 pieces of junk snail-mail addressed to Dr. Nick Riviera at my home address, which I should point out is not "123 Main St", and I don't live in "Anytown, IA".

Re:declining value

Actually, if there is any demand at all for niche programming, the data will reflect that. As an example of how ratings do not always lead to what you call "majority oriented" programming, "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" is about 70th in the Neilson ratings (which is pathetic... that means it is getting about a 2.0 share, at best), but there is a 4-way network war going on to pick up the show next season, because advertisers know that Buffy has a very loyal cult following.

On the other hand, if all the people like you who prefer the more obscure shows are too paranoid to participate in the survey, the data will show that we all really love watching "Will and Grace", and you will get 24 hours of nothing else.

Re:ratings?

Nielson ratings require an extra piece of equipment hooked into your TV. But Digital Cable has a transmitter built right in to the cable box. That is how it requests listings for certain times. The cable company could be using that for info collecting purposes.

Re:This surprises you???

I just don't understand the twisted belief that aggregating the viewing habits of the entire TiVo subscriber base is a privacy concern. In order for something to be a "privacy" issue, it must relate to "private" (see the similarity of the words?) information about a person, not statistical information about a large group.

It's this kind of story that makes us seem like paranoid nuts to the population at large. Why don't we only sound the alarm when a company does violate people's privacy rather than every time we find out that some company could, if the so chose, violate someone's privacy?

Everyone wants your data

You know, it occurs to me that companies aren't just willing to sell things to you anymore and let you go on your merry way. Now you not only pay with your hard-earned money but also with your demographics. When was the last Web site you saw where you could just go in, add one or more products to your shopping cart and simply check out without having to register and tell the company everything about yourself, including what you had for breakfast that morning? And this tactic isn't just happening online anymore. This morning's Atlanta Journal-Constitution has a story [accessatlanta.com] about how Kroger is now limiting most of its sale items to those who sign up for its discount card. And yes, they can and do keep track of what you buy. And like everyone else, they say that they'll never divulge that data. I wonder how many companies would be willing to write that promise into a legally-binding contract. Not many, I bet. You'd think that retailers would be happy to just sell us things, but no, they want to also sell us to marketers. And I don't buy the BS that this allows them to lower the prices they charge us. They're doing it to make more money, not so they can give us the benefit of lower prices. If a marketer wants my data, then they can pay me in cold hard cash. After all, it's my data, damn it. You want my demographics? Fine, show me the money! If I like your offer, then maybe we'll talk.

Re:So what?

If it makes my television viewing better, then I'm all for *anonymous* tracking.

And tell me how is this supposed to make your television viewing better, huh? This will just result in TV program being adjusted to the lowest common denominator (not that it's not already) and quality programs that are targeted at a bit more discerning viewers will disappear altogether. Viewing rate is King after all! Then we will have a flood of Survivor and Temptation Island or whatever the fuck they call it these days and live coverages of school shootings.

Happy viewing!