You're viewing part of a thread.
right 30 years of selling user data an enshittification and the home assistants from a companny that regularly pays fines for privacy infringement
Please point out a single instance where Microsoft was fined not using the data in the way described in the terms of service.
https://www.cnil.fr/en/cookies-microsoft-ireland-operations-limited-fined-60-million-euros
And then there are the cases where European institutions got sued for USING Microsoft products.
Let's see if the Microsoft bootlicker has an argument other than "Oh but that was in the past, who's to say it's still happening?"
Tell me you are desperately searching Google for ammo without saying a word.
The links there have nothing to do with changing policy or not being upfront. The children thing is about MS missing alerts to parents over changes to specific property charges. It's not like they didn't even have alerts, just not for these properties. Real fucking evil right?
All of these legal challenge are on the implementation not MS lying to you in the ToS. They used both of these services as documentated.
So again, show me a case where MS lied about what is collected and not this desperate unrelated bullshit. MS isn't lying about how they are using your data.
Oh boy. Do I need to crack open the case from 2018 where a Dutch team found out that Microsoft was collecting data WITHOUT stating it in the ToS.
https://www.theregister.com/2018/11/16/microsoft_gdpr
Also: Even when stuff is written in the ToS it can still be illegal. (According to European law) Microsoft has broken GDPR laws in the past and will continue to do so. Whether it is written in the ToS or not.
(PS: I am not using the data hog google either) (PS: it is called "researching". Not " desperately searching for ammo")
So thankfully you've actually brought something pertaining to the conversation rather than the other folks. I agree googling is a tool but what the above folks are doing is what I have now deemed trumping. Hearing something they don't like, entering in the keywords they want to prove, and then linking it with little understanding. I mean come on, they tried to say that MS not emailing parents with a profile picture update notification is some scheme.
As for your link, yep that's pretty much MS's only GDPR fuck up that's about what was collected. It was bad. But I do not believe it was intentional nor is it uncommon to find these sorts of things with many companies. Audits happen, findings get reported , shit gets fixed. This was an egregious one and they got a big ole fine and they deserved it. But it's incident that was quickly fixed. Not a pattern.